Mortality Predictors and Associated Factors in Patients in the Intensive Care Unit: A Cross-Sectional Study.

IF 1.8 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Critical Care Research and Practice Pub Date : 2020-08-01 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2020/1483827
Fernanda G de M Soares Pinheiro, Eduesley Santana Santos, Íkaro Daniel de C Barreto, Carleara Weiss, Andreia C Vaez, Jussiely C Oliveira, Matheus S Melo, Francilene A Silva
{"title":"Mortality Predictors and Associated Factors in Patients in the Intensive Care Unit: A Cross-Sectional Study.","authors":"Fernanda G de M Soares Pinheiro,&nbsp;Eduesley Santana Santos,&nbsp;Íkaro Daniel de C Barreto,&nbsp;Carleara Weiss,&nbsp;Andreia C Vaez,&nbsp;Jussiely C Oliveira,&nbsp;Matheus S Melo,&nbsp;Francilene A Silva","doi":"10.1155/2020/1483827","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU) has been associated to an array of risk factors. Identification of risk factors potentially contribute to predict and reduce mortality rates in the ICU. The objectives of the study were to determine the prevalence and the factors associated with the mortality and to analyze the survival.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A cross-sectional study conducted in two clinical and surgical ICU in the state of Sergipe, northeastern Brazil. We enrolled 316 patients with at least 48 h of hospitalization, minimum age of 18 years old, sedated or weaned, with RASS ≥ -3, between July 2017 and April 2018. We categorized data in (1) age and gender, (2) clinical condition, and (3) prevalence of delirium. Data from enrolled patients were collected from enrollment until death or ICU discharge. Patients' outcomes were categorized in (1) death and (2) nondeath (discharge).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one percent of participants died. Age (53 ± 17 years <i>vs</i>. 45 ± 18 years, <i>p</i> < 0.01), electrolyte disturbance (30.3% <i>vs</i> 18.1%, <i>p</i>=0.029), glycemic index (33.3% <i>vs</i> 18.2%, <i>p</i>=0.008), tube feeding (83.3% vs 67.1%, <i>p</i>=0.01), mechanical ventilation (50% <i>vs</i> 35.7%, <i>p</i>=0.035), sedation with fentanyl (24.2 <i>vs</i> 13.6, <i>p</i>=0.035), use of insulin (33.8% <i>vs</i> 21.7%, <i>p</i>=0.042), and higher Charlson score (2.61 <i>vs</i> 2.17, <i>p</i>=0.041) were significantly associated with death on the adjusted model. However, the regression model indicated that patients admitted from the emergency (HR = 0.40, <i>p</i>=0.006) and glycemic index alterations (HR = 1.68, <i>p</i>=0.047) were associated with mortality. There was no statistically significant difference (<i>p</i>=0.540) in survival between patients with and without delirium, based on the survival analysis and length of hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The prevalence of death was 21%, and age, electrolyte disturbance, glycemic index, tube feeding, mechanical ventilation, sedation with fentanyl, use of insulin, and higher Charlson score were associated with mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":46583,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Research and Practice","volume":"2020 ","pages":"1483827"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2020/1483827","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1483827","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Background: Mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU) has been associated to an array of risk factors. Identification of risk factors potentially contribute to predict and reduce mortality rates in the ICU. The objectives of the study were to determine the prevalence and the factors associated with the mortality and to analyze the survival.

Method: A cross-sectional study conducted in two clinical and surgical ICU in the state of Sergipe, northeastern Brazil. We enrolled 316 patients with at least 48 h of hospitalization, minimum age of 18 years old, sedated or weaned, with RASS ≥ -3, between July 2017 and April 2018. We categorized data in (1) age and gender, (2) clinical condition, and (3) prevalence of delirium. Data from enrolled patients were collected from enrollment until death or ICU discharge. Patients' outcomes were categorized in (1) death and (2) nondeath (discharge).

Results: Twenty-one percent of participants died. Age (53 ± 17 years vs. 45 ± 18 years, p < 0.01), electrolyte disturbance (30.3% vs 18.1%, p=0.029), glycemic index (33.3% vs 18.2%, p=0.008), tube feeding (83.3% vs 67.1%, p=0.01), mechanical ventilation (50% vs 35.7%, p=0.035), sedation with fentanyl (24.2 vs 13.6, p=0.035), use of insulin (33.8% vs 21.7%, p=0.042), and higher Charlson score (2.61 vs 2.17, p=0.041) were significantly associated with death on the adjusted model. However, the regression model indicated that patients admitted from the emergency (HR = 0.40, p=0.006) and glycemic index alterations (HR = 1.68, p=0.047) were associated with mortality. There was no statistically significant difference (p=0.540) in survival between patients with and without delirium, based on the survival analysis and length of hospitalization.

Conclusion: The prevalence of death was 21%, and age, electrolyte disturbance, glycemic index, tube feeding, mechanical ventilation, sedation with fentanyl, use of insulin, and higher Charlson score were associated with mortality.

Abstract Image

重症监护病房患者的死亡率预测因素和相关因素:一项横断面研究。
背景:重症监护室(ICU)的死亡率与一系列风险因素有关。风险因素的识别可能有助于预测和降低重症监护室的死亡率。本研究的目的是确定患病率和与死亡率相关的因素,并分析生存率。方法:在巴西东北部塞尔希培州的两个临床和外科ICU进行横断面研究。我们招募了316名患者,其中至少48人 住院h,最低年龄18岁,服用镇静剂或断奶,患有RASS ≥ -3,2017年7月至2018年4月。我们将数据分类为(1)年龄和性别,(2)临床状况,以及(3)谵妄的患病率。从入组到死亡或ICU出院,收集入组患者的数据。患者的结局分为(1)死亡和(2)非死亡(出院)。结果:21%的参与者死亡。年龄(53 ± 17年对45年 ± 18岁,p<0.01)、电解质紊乱(30.3%vs 18.1%,p=0.029)、血糖指数(33.3%vs 18.2%,p=0.008)、管饲(83.3%vs 67.1%,p=0.001)、机械通气(50%vs 35.7%,p=0.035)、芬太尼镇静(24.2%vs 13.6,p=0.035,在调整后的模型中,较高的Charlson评分(2.61比2.17,p=0.041)与死亡显著相关。然而,回归模型表明,急诊入院的患者(HR = 0.40,p=0.006)和血糖指数变化(HR = 1.68,p=0.047)与死亡率相关。根据生存分析和住院时间,谵妄患者和非谵妄患者的生存率没有统计学上的显著差异(p=0.540)。结论:死亡发生率为21%,年龄、电解质紊乱、血糖指数、管饲、机械通气、芬太尼镇静、胰岛素使用和较高的Charlson评分与死亡率相关。
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
Critical Care Research and Practice
Critical Care Research and Practice CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
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