Suppr超能文献

REMS 与其他三种早期预警评分在预测急诊科 COVID-19 患者住院死亡率方面的效用比较:一项多中心验证研究。

The utility of the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) compared with three other early warning scores in predicting in-hospital mortality among COVID-19 patients in the emergency department: a multicenter validation study.

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Department of Emergency Medicine, Banphaeo General Hospital, Samutsakhon, Thailand.

出版信息

BMC Emerg Med. 2023 Apr 26;23(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s12873-023-00814-w.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Many early warning scores (EWSs) have been validated to prognosticate adverse outcomes of COVID-19 in the Emergency Department (ED), including the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS). However, the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) has not been widely validated for this purpose. We aimed to assess and compare the prognostic utility of REMS with that of qSOFA, MEWS, and NEWS for predicting mortality in emergency COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

We conducted a multi-center retrospective study at five EDs of various levels of care in Thailand. Adult patients visiting the ED who tested positive for COVID-19 prior to ED arrival or within the index hospital visit between January and December 2021 were included. Their EWSs at ED arrival were calculated and analysed. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcome was mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

A total of 978 patients were included in the study; 254 (26%) died at hospital discharge, and 155 (15.8%) were intubated. REMS yielded the highest discrimination capacity for in-hospital mortality (the area under the receiver operator characteristics curves (AUROC) 0.771 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.738, 0.804)), which was significantly higher than qSOFA (AUROC 0.620 (95%CI 0.589, 0.651); p < 0.001), MEWS (AUROC 0.657 (95%CI 0.619, 0.694); p < 0.001), and NEWS (AUROC 0.732 (95%CI 0.697, 0.767); p = 0.037). REMS was also the best EWS in terms of calibration, overall model performance, and balanced diagnostic accuracy indices at its optimal cutoff. REMS also performed better than other EWSs for mechanical ventilation.

CONCLUSION

REMS was the early warning score with the highest prognostic utility as it outperformed qSOFA, MEWS, and NEWS in predicting in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients in the ED.

摘要

背景

许多早期预警评分(EWS)已被验证可预测急诊科(ED)中 COVID-19 的不良结局,包括快速序贯器官衰竭评估(qSOFA)、改良早期预警评分(MEWS)和国家早期预警评分(NEWS)。然而,快速急诊医学评分(REMS)尚未被广泛验证用于此目的。我们旨在评估和比较 REMS 与 qSOFA、MEWS 和 NEWS 预测急诊 COVID-19 患者死亡率的预后价值。

方法

我们在泰国 5 家不同级别护理的 ED 进行了一项多中心回顾性研究。纳入 2021 年 1 月至 12 月期间在 ED 就诊前或在指数住院期间检测出 COVID-19 阳性的成年 ED 就诊患者。计算并分析他们在 ED 到达时的 EWS。主要结局是全因院内死亡率。次要结局是机械通气。

结果

共有 978 例患者纳入研究;254 例(26%)在出院时死亡,155 例(15.8%)需要插管。REMS 对院内死亡率的区分能力最高(受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)为 0.771(95%置信区间(CI)0.738,0.804)),明显高于 qSOFA(AUROC 0.620(95%CI 0.589,0.651);p<0.001)、MEWS(AUROC 0.657(95%CI 0.619,0.694);p<0.001)和 NEWS(AUROC 0.732(95%CI 0.697,0.767);p=0.037)。在最佳截断值处,REMS 在校准、整体模型性能和平衡诊断准确性指标方面也是最佳 EWS。REMS 对机械通气的预测效果也优于其他 EWS。

结论

REMS 是预测 ED 中 COVID-19 患者院内死亡率最具预后价值的预警评分,其性能优于 qSOFA、MEWS 和 NEWS。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c37d/10134600/5e8ef3d56d8e/12873_2023_814_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验