{"title":"国家早期预警评分和快速急诊医学评分与APACHE II评分作为预测医疗急救小组激活患者死亡率的比较:一项单中心回顾性队列研究","authors":"Junpei Haruna, Hiroomi Tatsumi, Satoshi Kazuma, Hiromitsu Kuroda, Yuya Goto, Wakiko Aisaka, Hirofumi Terada, Tomoko Sonoda, Yoshiki Masuda","doi":"10.2478/jccm-2021-0040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The medical emergency team enables the limitation of patients' progression to critical illness in the general ward. The early warning scoring system (EWS) is one of the criteria for medical emergency team activation; however, it is not a valid criterion to predict the prognosis of patients with MET activation.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>In this study, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) was compared with that of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score in predicting the prognosis of patients who had been treated a medical emergency team.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>In this single-centre retrospective cohort study, patients treated by a medical emergency team between April 2013 and March 2019 and the 28-day prognosis of MET-activated patients were assessed using APACHE II, NEWS, and REMS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 196 patients enrolled, 152 (77.5%) were men, and 44 (22.5%) were women. Their median age was 68 years (interquartile range: 57-76 years). The most common cause of medical emergency team activation was respiratory failure (43.4%). Univariate analysis showed that APACHE II score, NEWS, and REMS were associated with 28-day prognostic mortality. There was no significant difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of APACHE II (0.76), NEWS (0.67), and REMS (0.70); however, the sensitivity of NEWS (0.70) was superior to that of REMS (0.47).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>NEWS is a more sensitive screening tool like APACHE II than REMS for predicting the prognosis of patients with medical emergency team activation. However, because the accuracy of NEWS was not sufficient compared with that of APACHE II score, it is necessary to develop a screening tool with higher sensitivity and accuracy that can be easily calculated at the bedside in the general ward.</p>","PeriodicalId":44227,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Critical Care Medicine","volume":"7 4","pages":"283-289"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/5a/2a/jccm-07-283.PMC8647673.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the National Early Warning Scores and Rapid Emergency Medicine Scores with the APACHE II Scores as a Prediction of Mortality in Patients with Medical Emergency Team Activation: a Single-centre Retrospective Cohort Study.\",\"authors\":\"Junpei Haruna, Hiroomi Tatsumi, Satoshi Kazuma, Hiromitsu Kuroda, Yuya Goto, Wakiko Aisaka, Hirofumi Terada, Tomoko Sonoda, Yoshiki Masuda\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/jccm-2021-0040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The medical emergency team enables the limitation of patients' progression to critical illness in the general ward. The early warning scoring system (EWS) is one of the criteria for medical emergency team activation; however, it is not a valid criterion to predict the prognosis of patients with MET activation.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>In this study, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) was compared with that of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score in predicting the prognosis of patients who had been treated a medical emergency team.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>In this single-centre retrospective cohort study, patients treated by a medical emergency team between April 2013 and March 2019 and the 28-day prognosis of MET-activated patients were assessed using APACHE II, NEWS, and REMS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 196 patients enrolled, 152 (77.5%) were men, and 44 (22.5%) were women. Their median age was 68 years (interquartile range: 57-76 years). The most common cause of medical emergency team activation was respiratory failure (43.4%). Univariate analysis showed that APACHE II score, NEWS, and REMS were associated with 28-day prognostic mortality. There was no significant difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of APACHE II (0.76), NEWS (0.67), and REMS (0.70); however, the sensitivity of NEWS (0.70) was superior to that of REMS (0.47).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>NEWS is a more sensitive screening tool like APACHE II than REMS for predicting the prognosis of patients with medical emergency team activation. However, because the accuracy of NEWS was not sufficient compared with that of APACHE II score, it is necessary to develop a screening tool with higher sensitivity and accuracy that can be easily calculated at the bedside in the general ward.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44227,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Critical Care Medicine\",\"volume\":\"7 4\",\"pages\":\"283-289\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/5a/2a/jccm-07-283.PMC8647673.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Critical Care Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/jccm-2021-0040\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jccm-2021-0040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of the National Early Warning Scores and Rapid Emergency Medicine Scores with the APACHE II Scores as a Prediction of Mortality in Patients with Medical Emergency Team Activation: a Single-centre Retrospective Cohort Study.
Introduction: The medical emergency team enables the limitation of patients' progression to critical illness in the general ward. The early warning scoring system (EWS) is one of the criteria for medical emergency team activation; however, it is not a valid criterion to predict the prognosis of patients with MET activation.
Aim: In this study, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) was compared with that of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score in predicting the prognosis of patients who had been treated a medical emergency team.
Material and methods: In this single-centre retrospective cohort study, patients treated by a medical emergency team between April 2013 and March 2019 and the 28-day prognosis of MET-activated patients were assessed using APACHE II, NEWS, and REMS.
Results: Of the 196 patients enrolled, 152 (77.5%) were men, and 44 (22.5%) were women. Their median age was 68 years (interquartile range: 57-76 years). The most common cause of medical emergency team activation was respiratory failure (43.4%). Univariate analysis showed that APACHE II score, NEWS, and REMS were associated with 28-day prognostic mortality. There was no significant difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of APACHE II (0.76), NEWS (0.67), and REMS (0.70); however, the sensitivity of NEWS (0.70) was superior to that of REMS (0.47).
Conclusion: NEWS is a more sensitive screening tool like APACHE II than REMS for predicting the prognosis of patients with medical emergency team activation. However, because the accuracy of NEWS was not sufficient compared with that of APACHE II score, it is necessary to develop a screening tool with higher sensitivity and accuracy that can be easily calculated at the bedside in the general ward.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
