The use of severity assessment scales in evaluating the transportability of newborns: a cohort retrospective study

R. Mukhametshin, N. S. Davydova
{"title":"The use of severity assessment scales in evaluating the transportability of newborns: a cohort retrospective study","authors":"R. Mukhametshin, N. S. Davydova","doi":"10.21320/1818-474x-2021-4-98-105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Standardized assessment of the patient status and the decision on the possibility of transfer is an essential part of the neonatal transport service. However, there are no generally accepted tools for assessing severity and making decisions regarding newborn transfer. Objectives. To compare the capabilities of scales in relation to the decision about the non-transportability of newborns. Materials and Methods. The cohort study included data from 604 trips of the transport team of the neonatal resuscitation and consultation center. The assessment was carried out on the KSHONN, NTISS and TRIPS scales, the distribution of transportable and non-transportable patients was studied depending on the assessment for each scale. The calculation of the risk ratio of nontransportation was performed depending on the assessment on the scales. AUC ROC was calculated for all scales in relation to the decision of transport team about the patient’s non-transportability. Results. The scores on the scales significantly differ between the subgroups of transportable and non-transportable newborns, p < 0.0001. Significant differences in subgroup distribution were observed depending on the scores between transportable and nontransportable patients. When evaluated by KSHONN 6-8 points, the risk ratio of non-transportability was 61.36 [3.77-999.47]. For NTISS of 20-29 points, the risk ratio of non-transportability was 51.37 [3.18-829.11]. When evaluated by TRIPS 17-23 points, the risk ratio of nontransportability was 18.81 [1.09 - 327.26]. Conclusions. Scales have a high predictor value in relation to the decision of the transport team about the non-transportability of patients. Comparison of the subgroups by the proportion of non-transportable patients indicates that a score of more than 5 according to the KSHONN, more than 19 points on the NTISS scale and more than 16 points on the TRIPS scale are associated with a significant increase in the risk of non-transportability.","PeriodicalId":93261,"journal":{"name":"Annals of pulmonary and critical care medicine","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of pulmonary and critical care medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21320/1818-474x-2021-4-98-105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction. Standardized assessment of the patient status and the decision on the possibility of transfer is an essential part of the neonatal transport service. However, there are no generally accepted tools for assessing severity and making decisions regarding newborn transfer. Objectives. To compare the capabilities of scales in relation to the decision about the non-transportability of newborns. Materials and Methods. The cohort study included data from 604 trips of the transport team of the neonatal resuscitation and consultation center. The assessment was carried out on the KSHONN, NTISS and TRIPS scales, the distribution of transportable and non-transportable patients was studied depending on the assessment for each scale. The calculation of the risk ratio of nontransportation was performed depending on the assessment on the scales. AUC ROC was calculated for all scales in relation to the decision of transport team about the patient’s non-transportability. Results. The scores on the scales significantly differ between the subgroups of transportable and non-transportable newborns, p < 0.0001. Significant differences in subgroup distribution were observed depending on the scores between transportable and nontransportable patients. When evaluated by KSHONN 6-8 points, the risk ratio of non-transportability was 61.36 [3.77-999.47]. For NTISS of 20-29 points, the risk ratio of non-transportability was 51.37 [3.18-829.11]. When evaluated by TRIPS 17-23 points, the risk ratio of nontransportability was 18.81 [1.09 - 327.26]. Conclusions. Scales have a high predictor value in relation to the decision of the transport team about the non-transportability of patients. Comparison of the subgroups by the proportion of non-transportable patients indicates that a score of more than 5 according to the KSHONN, more than 19 points on the NTISS scale and more than 16 points on the TRIPS scale are associated with a significant increase in the risk of non-transportability.
严重性评估量表在评估新生儿可转移性中的应用:一项队列回顾性研究
介绍。对患者状况的标准化评估和对转移可能性的决定是新生儿转运服务的重要组成部分。然而,目前还没有普遍接受的工具来评估新生儿移植的严重程度和做出决定。目标。比较量表的能力与新生儿不可运输性决策的关系。材料与方法。队列研究包括新生儿复苏和咨询中心运输组604次旅行的数据。采用KSHONN、NTISS和TRIPS量表进行评估,根据每个量表的评估结果,研究可转移和不可转移患者的分布情况。根据对量表的评估,计算不运输的风险比。计算所有量表的AUC ROC与转运团队对患者不可转运的决定有关。结果。可移动新生儿与不可移动新生儿亚组间量表得分差异有统计学意义(p < 0.0001)。根据可转移和不可转移患者的评分,观察到亚组分布的显著差异。以KSHONN 6-8分评价时,不可运输性风险比为61.36[3.77-999.47]。NTISS为20 ~ 29分时,不可运输风险比为51.37[3.18 ~ 829.11]。按TRIPS 17-23分评估,不可运输性风险比为18.81[1.09 - 327.26]。结论。量表有一个高的预测值,在有关的决定转运团队关于病人的不可转运。按不可转移患者比例对亚组进行比较表明,KSHONN评分超过5分,NTISS评分超过19分,TRIPS评分超过16分,不可转移风险显著增加。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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