Poses R M, Smith W R, McClish D K, Huber E C, Clemo F L, Schmitt B P, Alexander-Forti D, Racht E M, Colenda C C, Centor R M
Division of General Internal Medicine, Memorial Hospital of Rhode Island, Pawtucket, USA.
Arch Intern Med. 1997 May 12;157(9):1001-7.
Current guidelines suggest that patients with low likelihoods of survival may be excluded from intensive care. Patients with new or exacerbated congestive heart failure are frequently but not inevitably admitted to critical care units.
To assess how well physicians could predict the probability of survival for acutely ill patients with congestive heart failure, and in particular how well they could identify patients with small chances of survival.
This was a prospective cohort study done in the emergency departments of a university hospital, a Veterans Affairs medical center, and a community hospital. The study population was consecutive adults for whom new or exacerbated congestive heart failure, diagnosed clinically, was a major reason for the emergency department visit. Physicians caring for the study patients in the emergency departments recorded their judgments of the numeric probability that each patient would survive for 90 days and for 1 year. The patients vital status at 90 days and 1 year was ascertained by multiple means, including interview, chart review, and review of hospital and state databases.
By calibration curve analysis, the physicians underestimated survival probability at both 90 days and 1 year, particularly for patients they judged to have the lowest probabilities of survival. Their predictions had modest discriminating ability (receiver operating characteristic curve areas, 0.66 [SE = 0.020] for 90 days; 0.63 [SE = 0.017] for 1 year). The physicians identified only 15 patients they judged to have a 90-day survival probability of 10% or less, whose survival rate was actually 33.3%.
Physicians have great difficulty predicting survival for patients with acute congestive heart failure and cannot identify patients with poor chances of survival. Current triage guidelines that suggest patients with poor chances of survival may be excluded from critical care may be impractical or harmful.
当前指南建议,生存可能性低的患者可能不被收入重症监护病房。新发或病情加重的充血性心力衰竭患者常被收入重症监护病房,但并非必然如此。
评估医生对急性充血性心力衰竭患者生存概率的预测能力,尤其是他们识别生存机会小的患者的能力。
这是一项在前瞻性队列研究,在一家大学医院、一家退伍军人事务医疗中心和一家社区医院的急诊科进行。研究对象为连续就诊的成年人,临床诊断为新发或病情加重的充血性心力衰竭是其就诊急诊科的主要原因。在急诊科照料研究患者的医生记录他们对每位患者存活90天和1年的数字概率的判断。通过多种方式确定患者在90天和1年时的生命状态,包括访谈、病历审查以及医院和州数据库审查。
通过校准曲线分析,医生低估了90天和1年时的生存概率,尤其是对他们判断生存概率最低的患者。他们的预测具有适度的辨别能力(受试者工作特征曲线面积,90天时为0.66[标准误=0.020];1年时为0.63[标准误=0.017])。医生仅识别出15名他们判断90天生存概率为10%或更低的患者,而这些患者的实际生存率为33.3%。
医生在预测急性充血性心力衰竭患者的生存情况方面有很大困难,无法识别出生存机会小的患者。当前建议生存机会小的患者可能不被收入重症监护病房的分诊指南可能不切实际或有害。