首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Archives of Emergency Medicine >Do we know what people die of in the emergency department?
【2h】

Do we know what people die of in the emergency department?

机译:我们知道人们在急诊室死了吗?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Objective: To establish the discrepancy rate between the predicted cause of death and the actual cause of death as determined by postmortem examination result, for all deaths in the emergency department reported to the Scottish Procurator Fiscal and subsequently undergoing postmortem examination. >Methods: A prospective study of all patients who were dead on arrival or died in the emergency department of a busy Glasgow hospital over a 12 month period. The most senior emergency physician present at the time of death predicted the cause of death. This was then compared to the actual postmortem examination determined cause of death and was considered either to be correct or incorrect. >Results: During the study period, 146 patients were pronounced dead in the department. Of these, 81 patients (age range 39–99 years, median 71; male:female 2.5:1) had death certificates issued, 63 patients (age range 26 days to 99 years, median 48; male:female 2.4:1) had a postmortem performed by the forensic pathologist, and two patients underwent a "view and grant". Of the 63 deaths reported to the Procurator Fiscal, the emergency physician attributed 51 (80.1%) to non-trauma, 9 (14.2%) to trauma, and in 3 (4.7%) cases were uncertain. Of the 63 (39.7%) deaths, 25 were inaccurately predicted (99% confidence interval 24.3% to 56.6%; p<0.0)1. Cardiovascular related and drugs poisoning deaths occurred most commonly. They were also the most accurately predicted cause of deaths. Intracranial events, pulmonary thromboembolism, and airway obstruction were also frequently predicted, but were often wrong. >Conclusions: This study highlights the difficulties in accurately identifying cause of death for patients who die suddenly. This could have implications for the accuracy of health service statistics.
机译:>目标:确定死后检查结果确定的预测死亡原因与实际死亡原因之间的差异率,针对向苏格兰检察官财政报告并随后进行死后检查的急诊部门中的所有死亡检查。 >方法:一项前瞻性研究是对12个月内到达格拉斯哥一家繁忙医院的急诊室死亡或死亡的所有患者进行的前瞻性研究。死亡时在场的最高级急诊医师可以预测死亡原因。然后将其与实际死后检查确定的死因进行比较,并认为是正确的还是不正确的。 >结果:在研究期间,该部门有146名患者被宣布死亡。其中,有81例患者(年龄39-99岁,中位71;男性:女性2.5:1)已签发死亡证明,有63例患者(年龄26天至99岁,中位48;男性:女性2.4:1)法医病理学家进行的一次验尸,并对两名患者进行了“查看并批准”。在报告给检察官的63例死亡中,急诊医师将51例(80.1%)归因于非创伤,将9例(14.2%)归因于创伤,在3例(4.7%)的病例中不确定。在63例(39.7%)死亡中,有25例预测不正确(99%置信区间24.3%至56.6%; p <0.0)1。心血管相关和药物中毒死亡最常见。它们也是最准确地预测死亡原因。颅内事件,肺血栓栓塞和气道阻塞也常被预测,但通常是错误的。 >结论:这项研究着重指出了难以准确识别突然死亡的患者的死亡原因。这可能会影响卫生服务统计的准确性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号