首页> 外文期刊>The American journal of emergency medicine >Comparison of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scoring system, and Trauma and Injury Severity Score method for predicting the outcomes of intensive care unit trauma patients
【24h】

Comparison of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scoring system, and Trauma and Injury Severity Score method for predicting the outcomes of intensive care unit trauma patients

机译:序贯器官衰竭评估,急性生理和慢性健康评估II评分系统以及创伤和损伤严重度评分方法预测重症监护病房创伤患者预后的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the ability of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scoring system, and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) method to predict group mortality for intensive care unit (ICU) trauma patients. Methods: The medical records of 706 consecutive major trauma patients admitted to the ICU of Samsung Changwon Hospital from May 2006 to April 2010 were retrospectively examined. The SOFA and the APACHE II scores were calculated based on data from the first 24 hours of ICU admission, and the TRISS was calculated using initial laboratory data from the emergency department and operative data. The probability of death was calculated for each patient based on the SOFA score, APACHE II score, and TRISS equations. The ability to predict group mortality for the SOFA score, APACHE II score, and TRISS method was assessed by using 2-by-2 decision matrices and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and calibration analysis. Results: In 2-by-2 decision matrices with a decision criterion of 0.5, the sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies were 74.1%, 97.1%, and 92.4%, respectively, for the SOFA score; 58.5%, 99.6%, and 91.1%, respectively, for the APACHE II scoring system; and 52.4%, 94.8%, and 86.0%, respectively, for the TRISS method. In the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the areas under the curve for the SOFA score, APACHE II scoring system, and TRISS method were 0.953, 0.950, and 0.922, respectively. Conclusion: The results from the present study showed that the SOFA score was not different from APACHE II scoring system and TRISS in predicting the outcomes for ICU trauma patients. However, the method for calculating SOFA scores is easier and simpler than APACHE II and TRISS.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是评估序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA),急性生理学和慢性健康评估(APACHE)II评分系统以及创伤和损伤严重程度评分(TRISS)方法预测组死亡率的能力。重症监护病房(ICU)创伤患者。方法:回顾性分析2006年5月至2010年4月在三星昌原医院重症监护病房就诊的706例连续大创伤患者的病历。 SOFA和APACHE II分数是根据ICU入院后24小时的数据计算得出的,TRISS是根据急诊室的初始实验室数据和手术数据计算得出的。根据SOFA评分,APACHE II评分和TRISS方程计算每位患者的死亡概率。 SOFA评分,APACHE II评分和TRISS方法预测组死亡率的能力通过使用2比2决策矩阵以及接收器工作特征曲线分析和校准分析进行了评估。结果:在判定标准为0.5的2×2决策矩阵中,SOFA得分的敏感性,特异性和准确性分别为74.1%,97.1%和92.4%。 APACHE II评分系统分别为58.5%,99.6%和91.1%; TRISS方法分别为52.4%,94.8%和86.0%。在接收器工作特性曲线分析中,用于SOFA评分,APACHE II评分系统和TRISS方法的曲线下面积分别为0.953、0.950和0.922。结论:本研究的结果表明,在预测ICU创伤患者的预后方面,SOFA评分与APACHE II评分系统和TRISS没有区别。但是,计算SOFA分数的方法比APACHE II和TRISS更加容易和简单。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号