首页> 外文期刊>Clinical microbiology and infection: European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases >Severity of illness scoring systems in patients with bacteraemic pneumococcal pneumonia: implications for the intensive care unit care.
【24h】

Severity of illness scoring systems in patients with bacteraemic pneumococcal pneumonia: implications for the intensive care unit care.

机译:细菌性肺炎球菌性肺炎患者的疾病严重度评分系统:对重症监护病房的影响。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Severity of illness scoring systems are useful for decisions on the management of patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), including assessing the need for intensified therapy and monitoring, or for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. We compared the accuracy of the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), the CURB-65 and CRB-65 score, the modified-American Thoracic Society score (ATS), the IDSA/ATS guidelines and the Pitt Bacteraemia score (PBS) in evaluating severity of illness in 766 patients with bacteraemic pneumococcal pneumonia. We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity, the positive predictive value (PPV) and the negative predictive value (NPV) and the accuracy of the classification in predicting 14-day mortality. The PSI and the IDSA/ATS guidelines were the most sensitive whereas the PBS and modified-ATS scoring systems were the most specific in predicting mortality. The NPV was comparable for all four scoring systems (all above 90%), but the PPV was highest for PBS (54.2%) and lowest for PSI (23.2%). The predictive accuracy and discriminating power as measured by the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve was highest for the PBS. Both the modified-ATS and the PBS scoring systems identified those patients who might benefit most from intensified care and monitoring. The PBS and modified-ATS proved superior to the IDSA/ATS guidelines, CURB-65 and CRB-65 with respect to their specificity and PPV. The low PPV of the PSI rendered it not usable as a parameter for decision-making in severely-ill patients with pneumococcal bacteraemia.
机译:疾病严重程度评分系统对于决定社区获得性肺炎(CAP)患者的管理非常有用,包括评估对加强治疗和监测的需求,或对重症监护病房(ICU)的接受程度。我们比较了肺炎严重程度指数(PSI),CURB-65和CRB-65评分,改良的美国胸科学会评分(ATS),IDSA / ATS指南以及皮特细菌血症评分(PBS)在评估严重程度时的准确性766例细菌性肺炎球菌性肺炎的发病情况。我们评估了预测14天死亡率的敏感性和特异性,阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)以及分类的准确性。 PSI和IDSA / ATS指南对死亡率最敏感,而PBS和改良ATS评分系统对死亡率最具体。所有四个评分系统的NPV均相当(均高于90%),但PBS的PPV最高(54.2%),PSI的最低(23.2%)。通过PBS的接收器工作特性(ROC)曲线测得的预测准确性和区分能力最高。修改后的ATS和PBS评分系统均确定了那些可能从加护和监测中受益最大的患者。事实证明,PBS和修饰的ATS在特异性和PPV方面优于IDSA / ATS指南,CURB-65和CRB-65。 PSI的低PPV使其不能用作重症肺炎球菌菌血症患者的决策参数。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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