首页> 外文期刊>Respiratory care >Influence of the admission pattern on the outcome of patients admitted to a respiratory intensive care unit: Does a step-down admission differ from a step-up one?
【24h】

Influence of the admission pattern on the outcome of patients admitted to a respiratory intensive care unit: Does a step-down admission differ from a step-up one?

机译:入院方式对入院呼吸重症监护病房患者结局的影响:递减入院与递升入院是否有所不同?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background: The outcomes of patients admitted to a respiratory ICU (RICU) have been evaluated in the past, but no study has considered the influence of location prior to RICU admission. Methods: We analyzed prospectively collected data from 326 consecutive patients admitted to a 7-bed RICU. The primary end points were survival and severity of morbidity-related complications, evaluated according to the patient's location prior to RICU admission. Three admission pathways were considered: step-down for patients transferred from the ICUs of our hospital; step-up for patients coming from our respiratory wards or other medical wards; and directly for patients coming from the emergency department. The secondary end point was the potential influence of several risk factors for morbidity and mortality. Results: Of the 326 subjects, 92 (28%) died. Overall, subjects admitted in a step-up process had a significantly higher mortality (P < .001) than subjects in the other groups. The mortality rate was 64% for subjects admitted from respiratory ward, 43% for those from medical wards, and 18% for subjects from both ICU and emergency department (respiratory ward vs medical ward P = .04, respiratory ward vs emergency department P < .001, respiratory ward vs ICU P < .001, medical ward vs emergency department P < .001, and medical ward vs ICU P < .001). Subjects admitted from a respiratory ward had a lower albumin level, and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II was significantly higher in subjects following a step-up admission. About 30% of the subjects admitted from a respiratory ward received noninvasive ventilation as a "ceiling treatment." The highest odds ratios related to survival were subject location prior to RICU admission and female sex. Lack of use of noninvasive ventilation, younger age, female sex, higher albumin level, lower Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, higher Barthel score, and absence of chronic heart failure were also statistically associated with a lower risk of death. Conclusions: The pathway of admission to a RICU is a determinant of outcome. Patients following a step-up pattern are more likely to die. Other major determinants of survival are age, nutritional status and female sex.
机译:背景:过去曾评估过呼吸道ICU(RICU)入院患者的结局,但尚无研究考虑RICU入院前位置的影响。方法:我们分析了来自326例接受7张床的RICU的连续患者的前瞻性收集数据。主要终点是发病率和并发症相关并发症的严重程度,根据RICU入院前患者的位置进行评估。考虑了三种入院途径:从我院重症监护病房转诊的患者降级;加强对来自我们呼吸病房或其他医疗病房的患者的治疗;直接针对急诊科的患者。次要终点是发病率和死亡率的几种危险因素的潜在影响。结果:326名受试者中有92名(28%)死亡。总体而言,接受升压治疗的受试者的死亡率(P <0.001)明显高于其他组。从呼吸科病房入院的患者死亡率为64%,从医疗病房入院的患者死亡率为43%,来自ICU和急诊科的患者死亡率为18%(呼吸病房与医疗病房P = .04,呼吸病房与急诊科P < .001,呼吸病房vs ICU P <.001,医疗病房vs急诊室P <.001,医疗病房vs ICU P <.001)。从呼吸病房入院的受试者白蛋白水平较低,而在逐步入院后的受试者中,简化的急性生理学评分II明显更高。大约30%的呼吸科病房患者接受了无创通气作为“天花板治疗”。与生存相关的最高比值比是入读RICU之前的受试者所在位置和女性。从统计学上讲,缺乏无创通气,年龄较小,性别,较高的白蛋白水平,II的简化急性生理学评分较低,Barthel评分较高以及没有慢性心力衰竭也与死亡风险较低相关。结论:入读RICU的途径是结果的决定因素。遵循升压模式的患者更容易死亡。生存的其他主要决定因素是年龄,营养状况和女性。

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