Comparison of continuous vital signs data analysis versus venous lactate for the prediction of lifesaving interventions in patients with traumatic shock.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
SHOCK Pub Date : 2024-10-21 DOI:10.1097/SHK.0000000000002474
Shiming Yang, Peter Hu, William Teeter, Douglas J Floccare, Howard Hu, Samuel M Galvagno
{"title":"Comparison of continuous vital signs data analysis versus venous lactate for the prediction of lifesaving interventions in patients with traumatic shock.","authors":"Shiming Yang, Peter Hu, William Teeter, Douglas J Floccare, Howard Hu, Samuel M Galvagno","doi":"10.1097/SHK.0000000000002474","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The prehospital environment is fraught with operational constraints, making it difficult to assess the need for resources such as lifesaving interventions (LSI) for adults with traumatic injuries. While invasive methods such as lactate have been found to be highly predictive for estimating injury severity and resource requirements, noninvasive methods, to include continuous vital signs (VS), have the potential to provide prognostic information that can be quickly acquired, interpreted, and incorporated into decision making. In this work, we hypothesized that an analysis of continuous VS would have predictive capacity comparable to lactate and other laboratory tests for the prediction of injury severity, need for LSIs and intensive care unit (ICU) admission.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this pre-planned secondary analysis of 300 prospectively enrolled patients, venous blood samples were collected in the prehospital environment aboard a helicopter and analyzed with a portable lab device. Patients were transported to the primary adult resource center for trauma in the state of Maryland. Continuous VS were simultaneously collected. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the cohort and predictive models were constructed using a regularized gradient boosting framework with 10-fold cross-validation with additional analyses using Shapley additive explanations (SHAP).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Complete VS and laboratory data from 166 patients were available for analysis. The continuous VS models had better performance for prediction of receiving LSIs and ICU length of stay compared to single (initial) VS measurements. The continuous VS models had comparable performance to models using only laboratory tests in predicting discharge within 24 hours (continuous VS model: AUROC 0.71; 95% CI, 0.68-0.75 vs. lactate model: AUROC 0.65; 95% CI, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.66-0.71). The model using all laboratory data yielded the highest sensitivity and sensitivity (AUROC 0.77; 95% CI, 0.74-0.81).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The results from this study suggest that continuous VS obtained from autonomous monitors in an aeromedical environment may be helpful for predicting LSIs and the critical care requirements for traumatically injured adults. The collection and use of noninvasively obtained physiological data during the early stages of prehospital care may be useful for in developing user-friendly early warning systems for identifying potentially unstable trauma patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":21667,"journal":{"name":"SHOCK","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SHOCK","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000002474","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The prehospital environment is fraught with operational constraints, making it difficult to assess the need for resources such as lifesaving interventions (LSI) for adults with traumatic injuries. While invasive methods such as lactate have been found to be highly predictive for estimating injury severity and resource requirements, noninvasive methods, to include continuous vital signs (VS), have the potential to provide prognostic information that can be quickly acquired, interpreted, and incorporated into decision making. In this work, we hypothesized that an analysis of continuous VS would have predictive capacity comparable to lactate and other laboratory tests for the prediction of injury severity, need for LSIs and intensive care unit (ICU) admission.

Methods: In this pre-planned secondary analysis of 300 prospectively enrolled patients, venous blood samples were collected in the prehospital environment aboard a helicopter and analyzed with a portable lab device. Patients were transported to the primary adult resource center for trauma in the state of Maryland. Continuous VS were simultaneously collected. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the cohort and predictive models were constructed using a regularized gradient boosting framework with 10-fold cross-validation with additional analyses using Shapley additive explanations (SHAP).

Results: Complete VS and laboratory data from 166 patients were available for analysis. The continuous VS models had better performance for prediction of receiving LSIs and ICU length of stay compared to single (initial) VS measurements. The continuous VS models had comparable performance to models using only laboratory tests in predicting discharge within 24 hours (continuous VS model: AUROC 0.71; 95% CI, 0.68-0.75 vs. lactate model: AUROC 0.65; 95% CI, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.66-0.71). The model using all laboratory data yielded the highest sensitivity and sensitivity (AUROC 0.77; 95% CI, 0.74-0.81).

Discussion: The results from this study suggest that continuous VS obtained from autonomous monitors in an aeromedical environment may be helpful for predicting LSIs and the critical care requirements for traumatically injured adults. The collection and use of noninvasively obtained physiological data during the early stages of prehospital care may be useful for in developing user-friendly early warning systems for identifying potentially unstable trauma patients.

比较连续生命体征数据分析与静脉乳酸,以预测创伤性休克患者的救生干预措施。
简介:院前环境充满了操作限制,因此很难评估成人外伤患者对救生干预(LSI)等资源的需求。虽然乳酸等侵入性方法被认为对估计受伤严重程度和资源需求具有很高的预测性,但包括连续生命体征(VS)在内的非侵入性方法有可能提供可快速获取、解释并纳入决策的预后信息。在这项工作中,我们假设连续生命体征分析在预测损伤严重程度、LSI 需求和重症监护室(ICU)收治方面的预测能力可与乳酸和其他实验室检测相媲美:方法: 在这项预先计划好的对 300 名前瞻性登记患者的二次分析中,在直升机上的院前环境中采集静脉血样本,并使用便携式实验设备进行分析。患者被送往马里兰州主要的成人创伤资源中心。同时收集连续的 VS。描述性统计用于描述队列,预测模型的构建采用了正则梯度提升框架和 10 倍交叉验证,并使用 Shapley 加性解释 (SHAP) 进行了额外分析:共有 166 名患者的完整 VS 和实验室数据可供分析。与单一(初始)VS 测量相比,连续 VS 模型在预测接受 LSI 和重症监护室住院时间方面表现更佳。在预测 24 小时内出院方面,连续 VS 模型的性能与仅使用实验室检测的模型相当(连续 VS 模型的 AUROC 为 0.71;95%):AUROC 0.71; 95% CI, 0.68-0.75 vs. 乳酸模型:AUROC 0.65; 95% CI, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.66-0.71)。使用所有实验室数据的模型具有最高的灵敏度和敏感性(AUROC 0.77;95% CI,0.74-0.81):本研究的结果表明,在航空医疗环境中通过自主监护仪获得的连续 VS 可能有助于预测 LSI 和创伤性成人伤员的重症监护要求。在院前护理的早期阶段收集和使用无创获得的生理数据可能有助于开发用户友好型预警系统,以识别潜在的不稳定创伤患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
SHOCK
SHOCK 医学-外科
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
3.20%
发文量
199
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: SHOCK®: Injury, Inflammation, and Sepsis: Laboratory and Clinical Approaches includes studies of novel therapeutic approaches, such as immunomodulation, gene therapy, nutrition, and others. The mission of the Journal is to foster and promote multidisciplinary studies, both experimental and clinical in nature, that critically examine the etiology, mechanisms and novel therapeutics of shock-related pathophysiological conditions. Its purpose is to excel as a vehicle for timely publication in the areas of basic and clinical studies of shock, trauma, sepsis, inflammation, ischemia, and related pathobiological states, with particular emphasis on the biologic mechanisms that determine the response to such injury. Making such information available will ultimately facilitate improved care of the traumatized or septic individual.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信