• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

用于预测胃癌患者胃切除术后护理指标的Charlson法与Elixhauser法的比较

A Comparison of the Charlson and Elixhauser Methods for Predicting Nursing Indicators in Gastrectomy with Gastric Cancer Patients.

作者信息

Kim Chul-Gyu, Bae Kyun-Seop

机构信息

Department of Nursing, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Republic of Korea.

Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul 05505, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Jun 22;11(13):1830. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11131830.

DOI:10.3390/healthcare11131830
PMID:37444664
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10340285/
Abstract

Comorbidity indices such as Charlson's (CCI) and Elixhauser's (ECI) are used to adjust the patient's care, depending on the severity of their condition. However, no study has compared these indices' ability to predict nursing-sensitive outcomes (NSOs). We compared the performance of CCI and ECI in predicting NSOs in gastric cancer patients' gastrectomy. Gastric cancer patients with gastrectomy, aged 19 years or older and admitted between 2015 and 2016, were selected from the Korea Insurance Review and Assessment Service database. We examined the relationships between NSOs and CCI or ECI while adjusting patient and hospital characteristics with logistic regression. The ECI item model was the best in view of the C-statistic and Akaike Information Criterion for total NSO, physiologic/metabolic derangement, and deep vein thrombosis, while the Charlson item model was the best for upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding. For the C-statistic, the ECI item model was the best for in-hospital mortality, CNS complications, shock/cardiac arrest, urinary tract infection, pulmonary failure, and wound infection, while the CCI item model was the best for hospital-acquired pneumonia and pressure ulcers. In predicting 8 of 11 NSOs, the ECI item model outperformed the others. For other NSOs, the best model varies between the ECI item and CCI item model.

摘要

诸如查尔森合并症指数(CCI)和埃利克斯豪泽合并症指数(ECI)等合并症指数,用于根据患者病情的严重程度来调整其护理。然而,尚无研究比较过这些指数预测护理敏感结局(NSO)的能力。我们比较了CCI和ECI在预测胃癌患者胃切除术后NSO方面的表现。从韩国保险审查与评估服务数据库中选取了2015年至2016年间收治的年龄在19岁及以上且接受了胃切除术的胃癌患者。我们通过逻辑回归在调整患者和医院特征的同时,研究了NSO与CCI或ECI之间的关系。就总NSO、生理/代谢紊乱和深静脉血栓形成的C统计量和赤池信息准则而言,ECI分项模型最佳,而查尔森分项模型在上消化道出血方面表现最佳。对于C统计量,ECI分项模型在院内死亡率、中枢神经系统并发症、休克/心脏骤停、尿路感染、肺衰竭和伤口感染方面表现最佳,而CCI分项模型在医院获得性肺炎和压疮方面表现最佳。在预测11项NSO中的8项时,ECI分项模型的表现优于其他模型。对于其他NSO,最佳模型在ECI分项模型和CCI分项模型之间有所不同。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4156/10340285/9df4ea8ed8d4/healthcare-11-01830-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4156/10340285/9df4ea8ed8d4/healthcare-11-01830-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4156/10340285/9df4ea8ed8d4/healthcare-11-01830-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
A Comparison of the Charlson and Elixhauser Methods for Predicting Nursing Indicators in Gastrectomy with Gastric Cancer Patients.用于预测胃癌患者胃切除术后护理指标的Charlson法与Elixhauser法的比较
Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Jun 22;11(13):1830. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11131830.
2
Elixhauser Comorbidity Measure is Superior to Charlson Comorbidity Index In-Predicting Hospital Complications Following Elective Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion.Elixhauser 合并症度量优于 Charlson 合并症指数,可预测择期颈椎后路减压融合术后的医院并发症。
World Neurosurg. 2020 Jun;138:e26-e34. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.01.141. Epub 2020 Feb 14.
3
Relationship between nurse staffing level and adult nursing-sensitive outcomes in tertiary hospitals of Korea: Retrospective observational study.韩国三级医院护士人力配置水平与成人护理敏感结局的关系:回顾性观察研究。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2018 Apr;80:155-164. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.01.001. Epub 2018 Jan 2.
4
A Comparison of the Elixhauser and Charlson Comorbidity Indices: Predicting In-Hospital Complications Following Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusions.Elixhauser 和 Charlson 合并症指数比较:预测前路腰椎间融合术后住院并发症。
World Neurosurg. 2020 Dec;144:e353-e360. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.08.138. Epub 2020 Aug 22.
5
Predicting In-Hospital Complications After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Comparison of the Elixhauser and Charlson Comorbidity Indices.预测颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术后的院内并发症:Elixhauser 和 Charlson 合并症指数的比较。
World Neurosurg. 2020 Feb;134:e487-e496. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.10.102. Epub 2019 Oct 25.
6
Hospital frailty risk score is superior to legacy comorbidity indices for risk adjustment of in-hospital cirrhosis cases.对于住院肝硬化病例的风险调整,医院衰弱风险评分优于传统的合并症指数。
JHEP Rep. 2023 Nov 3;6(1):100955. doi: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2023.100955. eCollection 2024 Jan.
7
Validation of a neurovascular comorbidities index for retrospective database analysis.用于回顾性数据库分析的神经血管合并症指数的验证。
J Neurosurg. 2019 Jan 1;130(1):273-277. doi: 10.3171/2017.8.JNS171413. Epub 2018 Jan 26.
8
Comparison of Three Comorbidity Measures for Predicting In-Hospital Death through a Clinical Administrative Nacional Database.基于临床行政国家数据库比较三种合并症指标预测住院死亡的能力。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Sep 7;19(18):11262. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191811262.
9
Predicting in-hospital mortality for dementia patients after hip fracture surgery - A comparison between the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index.预测髋部骨折手术后痴呆患者的院内死亡率 - Charlson 合并症指数(CCI)与 Elixhauser 合并症指数的比较。
J Orthop Sci. 2021 May;26(3):396-402. doi: 10.1016/j.jos.2020.04.005. Epub 2020 May 30.
10
Comparison of risk adjustment methods in patients with liver disease using electronic medical record data.使用电子病历数据对肝病患者风险调整方法的比较
BMC Gastroenterol. 2017 Jan 7;17(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s12876-016-0559-4.

引用本文的文献

1
Admission Hemoglobin Associated with Increased Mortality in Hip Fracture Surgical Patients: An Observational Study.入院时血红蛋白与髋部骨折手术患者死亡率增加相关:一项观察性研究。
Biomedicines. 2024 Sep 8;12(9):2041. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines12092041.

本文引用的文献

1
Predictive validity of the braden scale for pressure injury risk assessment in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Braden 量表评估成人压力性损伤风险的预测效度:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Nurs Open. 2021 Sep;8(5):2194-2207. doi: 10.1002/nop2.792. Epub 2021 Feb 25.
2
A Comparison of the Elixhauser and Charlson Comorbidity Indices: Predicting In-Hospital Complications Following Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusions.Elixhauser 和 Charlson 合并症指数比较:预测前路腰椎间融合术后住院并发症。
World Neurosurg. 2020 Dec;144:e353-e360. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.08.138. Epub 2020 Aug 22.
3
Comparison of Elixhauser and Charlson Methods for Discriminative Performance in Mortality Risk in Patients with Schizophrenic Disorders.
比较 Elixhauser 和 Charlson 方法在精神分裂症患者死亡风险中的判别性能。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Apr 3;17(7):2450. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17072450.
4
Predicting In-Hospital Complications After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Comparison of the Elixhauser and Charlson Comorbidity Indices.预测颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术后的院内并发症:Elixhauser 和 Charlson 合并症指数的比较。
World Neurosurg. 2020 Feb;134:e487-e496. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.10.102. Epub 2019 Oct 25.
5
Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2018: an Evidence-based, Multi-disciplinary Approach.《2018年韩国胃癌诊疗指南:基于证据的多学科方法》
J Gastric Cancer. 2019 Mar;19(1):1-48. doi: 10.5230/jgc.2019.19.e8. Epub 2019 Mar 19.
6
The effect of nursing care delivery models on quality and safety outcomes of care: A cross-sectional survey study of medical-surgical nurses.护理服务模式对护理质量和安全结果的影响:一项外科护士的横断面调查研究。
J Adv Nurs. 2019 Oct;75(10):2144-2155. doi: 10.1111/jan.13997. Epub 2019 Apr 24.
7
A prediction tool for hospital-acquired pressure ulcers among surgical patients: Surgical pressure ulcer risk score.外科患者医院获得性压疮预测工具:外科压疮风险评分。
Int Wound J. 2019 Feb;16(1):164-175. doi: 10.1111/iwj.13007. Epub 2018 Oct 5.
8
Relationship between nurse staffing level and adult nursing-sensitive outcomes in tertiary hospitals of Korea: Retrospective observational study.韩国三级医院护士人力配置水平与成人护理敏感结局的关系:回顾性观察研究。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2018 Apr;80:155-164. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.01.001. Epub 2018 Jan 2.
9
Comparison of Elixhauser and Charlson Methods for Predicting Oral Cancer Survival.用于预测口腔癌生存率的Elixhauser法与Charlson法的比较
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Feb;95(7):e2861. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000002861.
10
Comparison of different comorbidity measures for oral cancer patients with surgical intervention: A longitudinal study from a single cancer center.口腔癌手术干预患者不同共病测量方法的比较:来自单一癌症中心的纵向研究。
Auris Nasus Larynx. 2016 Jun;43(3):322-9. doi: 10.1016/j.anl.2015.10.004. Epub 2015 Nov 28.