Rautonen J, Mäkelä A, Boyd H, Apajasalo M, Pohjavuori M
Childrens' Hospital, University of Helsinki, Finland.
Lancet. 1994 May 21;343(8908):1272-3. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(94)92158-x.
The performance of three scoring systems for assessing mortality risk for neonates--clinical risk index for babies (CRIB), score for neonatal acute physiology (SNAP), and SNAP's perinatal extension (SNAP-PE)--were tested in the same set of patients. In 222 neonates weighing less than 1500 g at birth, CRIB scores were significantly better for assessing mortality risk than SNAP (p = 0.017) or SNAP-PE (p < 0.001), areas under receiver operating characteristic curves being 0.89 (SE 0.02), 0.82 (0.03), and 0.79 (0.03), respectively. Male sex was independently associated with poor prognosis after taking the CRIB score into account with a risk ratio of 2.75. We conclude that CRIB is the most useful score for comparing the performance of neonatal intensive-care units. New treatment methods, however, may require modifications to the system.
在同一组患者中对三种评估新生儿死亡风险的评分系统——婴儿临床风险指数(CRIB)、新生儿急性生理学评分(SNAP)以及SNAP围产期扩展评分(SNAP-PE)进行了测试。在222例出生时体重小于1500克的新生儿中,CRIB评分在评估死亡风险方面显著优于SNAP(p = 0.017)或SNAP-PE(p < 0.001),受试者工作特征曲线下面积分别为0.89(标准误0.02)、0.82(0.03)和0.79(0.03)。在考虑CRIB评分后,男性性别与预后不良独立相关,风险比为2.75。我们得出结论,CRIB是比较新生儿重症监护病房性能最有用的评分。然而,新的治疗方法可能需要对该系统进行修改。