A comparison of different scores for mortality prediction of acutely poisoned patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 TOXICOLOGY
Toxicology Research Pub Date : 2025-06-21 eCollection Date: 2025-06-01 DOI:10.1093/toxres/tfaf080
Meng Wei, Xiaopeng Tu, Huan Li, Qiang Liu, Yu Tian
{"title":"A comparison of different scores for mortality prediction of acutely poisoned patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Meng Wei, Xiaopeng Tu, Huan Li, Qiang Liu, Yu Tian","doi":"10.1093/toxres/tfaf080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Acute poisoning typically accounts for 1%-3% of all emergency department (ED) visits, and comprise 4%-40% of admissions to intensive care units (ICU), with a mortality rate of 3%-6%. Accurate assessment of patient prognosis enables the early implementation of appropriate interventions and the effective allocation of limited resources, thereby preventing adverse outcomes. However, it remains unclear which tool offers superior predictive accuracy for the prognosis of poisoned patients. In this article, we review existing assessment tools used to predict mortality risk in poisoned patients and compare their performance. We conducted comprehensive searches in PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and SinoMed databases from their inception up to January 2025. Studies were included if they reported the performance of at least one scoring systems for predicting mortality in patients with acute poisoning. The PRISMA guidelines were followed (PROSPERO registration: CRD42024579941). Data of 60,403 patients across 65 studies were eligible for inclusion. The risk assessment tools reported in more than three studies included APACHE II (47), SOFA (19), SAPS II (11), PSS (16), MEWS (8), REMS (5), new-PMS (5). Significant heterogeneity was observed in the pooled analysis. In this study, PSS exhibited moderate sensitivity and specificity in predicting mortality among patients with acute poisoning, while MEWS demonstrated the highest sensitivity, and new-PMS showed the strongest specificity. The highest AUC values were observed for MEWS and APACHE II. Based on these findings, MEWS and new-PMS may represent the optimal tools for predicting in-hospital/28-day/30-day mortality in poisoned patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":105,"journal":{"name":"Toxicology Research","volume":"14 3","pages":"tfaf080"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12205934/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicology Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/toxres/tfaf080","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Acute poisoning typically accounts for 1%-3% of all emergency department (ED) visits, and comprise 4%-40% of admissions to intensive care units (ICU), with a mortality rate of 3%-6%. Accurate assessment of patient prognosis enables the early implementation of appropriate interventions and the effective allocation of limited resources, thereby preventing adverse outcomes. However, it remains unclear which tool offers superior predictive accuracy for the prognosis of poisoned patients. In this article, we review existing assessment tools used to predict mortality risk in poisoned patients and compare their performance. We conducted comprehensive searches in PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and SinoMed databases from their inception up to January 2025. Studies were included if they reported the performance of at least one scoring systems for predicting mortality in patients with acute poisoning. The PRISMA guidelines were followed (PROSPERO registration: CRD42024579941). Data of 60,403 patients across 65 studies were eligible for inclusion. The risk assessment tools reported in more than three studies included APACHE II (47), SOFA (19), SAPS II (11), PSS (16), MEWS (8), REMS (5), new-PMS (5). Significant heterogeneity was observed in the pooled analysis. In this study, PSS exhibited moderate sensitivity and specificity in predicting mortality among patients with acute poisoning, while MEWS demonstrated the highest sensitivity, and new-PMS showed the strongest specificity. The highest AUC values were observed for MEWS and APACHE II. Based on these findings, MEWS and new-PMS may represent the optimal tools for predicting in-hospital/28-day/30-day mortality in poisoned patients.

不同评分对急性中毒患者死亡率预测的比较:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
急性中毒通常占所有急诊科(ED)访问量的1%-3%,占重症监护病房(ICU)入院人数的4%-40%,死亡率为3%-6%。对患者预后的准确评估有助于早期实施适当的干预措施并有效分配有限的资源,从而预防不良后果。然而,目前尚不清楚哪种工具对中毒患者的预后预测准确性更高。在本文中,我们回顾了用于预测中毒患者死亡风险的现有评估工具,并比较了它们的性能。我们对PubMed、EMBASE、Ovid、Scopus、Cochrane Library、CNKI、万方数据、SinoMed等数据库进行了全面检索,检索时间从数据库成立到2025年1月。如果研究报告了至少一个用于预测急性中毒患者死亡率的评分系统的表现,则纳入研究。遵循PRISMA指南(PROSPERO注册:CRD42024579941)。65项研究60403例患者的数据符合纳入条件。在超过3项研究中报道的风险评估工具包括APACHE II(47)、SOFA(19)、SAPS II(11)、PSS(16)、MEWS(8)、REMS(5)、new-PMS(5)。在合并分析中观察到显著的异质性。本研究中,PSS在预测急性中毒患者死亡率方面表现出中等的敏感性和特异性,MEWS的敏感性最高,而new-PMS的特异性最强。MEWS和APACHE II的AUC值最高。基于这些发现,MEWS和new-PMS可能是预测中毒患者住院/28天/30天死亡率的最佳工具。
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
Toxicology Research
Toxicology Research TOXICOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: A multi-disciplinary journal covering the best research in both fundamental and applied aspects of toxicology
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信