Suppr超能文献

急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE)II评分与创伤严重程度评分(TRISS)在重症监护病房创伤患者预后评估中的比较。

A comparison of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score and the Trauma-Injury Severity Score (TRISS) for outcome assessment in intensive care unit trauma patients.

作者信息

Wong D T, Barrow P M, Gomez M, McGuire G P

机构信息

Department of Anesthesia, Toronto Hospital, University of Toronto, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 1996 Oct;24(10):1642-8. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199610000-00007.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess the ability of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) system and Trauma-Injury Severity Scoring (TRISS) system in predicting group mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) trauma patients.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

SETTING

A Canadian adult trauma tertiary referral hospital.

PATIENTS

Consecutive trauma patients admitted to the medical-surgical ICU or the neurosurgical ICU.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

For each patient, demographic data, mechanism of injury, and surgical status were collected. Revised Trauma Scores and Injury Severity Scores were calculated from emergency room and operative data. The APACHE II score was calculated based on the data from the first 24 hrs of ICU admission. The probability of death was calculated for each patient based on the APACHE II and TRISS equations. The ability to predict group mortality for APACHE II and TRISS was assessed by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, two by two decision matrices, and calibration curve analysis. Four hundred seventy trauma patients were admitted to the ICU. Sixty-three (13%) patients died and 407 (87%) survived. There were significant differences between survivors and nonsurvivors in age, Glasgow Coma Scale, Revised Trauma Score, Injury Severity Score, and APACHE II score. By receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the areas under the curves (+/- SEM) of APACHE II and TRISS were 0.92 +/- 0.02 and 0.89 +/- 0.02, respectively. Using two by two decision matrices with a decision criterion of 0.5, the sensitivities, specificities, and percentages correctly classified were 50.8%, 97.3%, and 91.1%, respectively, for APACHE II, and 50.8%, 97.1%, and 90.9%, respectively, for TRISS. From the calibration curves, the r2 value was .93 (p = .0001) for APACHE II and .67 (p = .004) for TRISS.

CONCLUSIONS

Both APACHE II and TRISS scores were shown to accurately predict group mortality in ICU trauma patients. APACHE II and TRISS may be utilized for quality assurance in ICU trauma patients. However, neither APACHE II nor TRISS provides sufficient confidence for prediction of outcome of individual patients.

摘要

目的

评估急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估系统(APACHE II)和创伤严重度评分系统(TRISS)预测重症监护病房(ICU)创伤患者群体死亡率的能力。

设计

前瞻性研究。

地点

加拿大一家成人创伤三级转诊医院。

患者

入住内科 - 外科ICU或神经外科ICU的连续创伤患者。

干预措施

无。

测量指标及主要结果

收集每位患者的人口统计学数据、损伤机制和手术情况。根据急诊室和手术数据计算修正创伤评分和损伤严重度评分。基于ICU入院后最初24小时的数据计算APACHE II评分。根据APACHE II和TRISS方程计算每位患者的死亡概率。通过受试者工作特征曲线分析、两两决策矩阵和校准曲线分析评估APACHE II和TRISS预测群体死亡率的能力。470例创伤患者入住ICU。63例(13%)患者死亡,407例(87%)存活。幸存者和非幸存者在年龄、格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分、修正创伤评分、损伤严重度评分和APACHE II评分方面存在显著差异。通过受试者工作特征曲线分析,APACHE II和TRISS曲线下面积(±标准误)分别为0.92±0.02和0.89±0.02。使用决策标准为0.5的两两决策矩阵,APACHE II的敏感度、特异度和正确分类百分比分别为50.8%、97.3%和91.1%,TRISS分别为50.8%、97.1%和90.9%。在校准曲线中,APACHE II的r2值为0.93(p = 0.0001),TRISS的r2值为0.67(p = 0.004)。

结论

APACHE II和TRISS评分均能准确预测ICU创伤患者的群体死亡率。APACHE II和TRISS可用于ICU创伤患者的质量保证。然而,APACHE II和TRISS都不能为预测个体患者的预后提供足够的可信度。

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