首页> 外文期刊>Pediatric critical care medicine: a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies >The suitability of the Pediatric Index of Mortality (PIM), PIM2, the Pediatric Risk of Mortality (PRISM), and PRISM III for monitoring the quality of pediatric intensive care in Australia and New Zealand.
【24h】

The suitability of the Pediatric Index of Mortality (PIM), PIM2, the Pediatric Risk of Mortality (PRISM), and PRISM III for monitoring the quality of pediatric intensive care in Australia and New Zealand.

机译:澳洲和新西兰的儿科死亡率指数(PIM),PIM2,儿科死亡风险(PRISM)和PRISM III适用于监测儿科重症监护的质量。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of the Pediatric Index of Mortality (PIM), PIM2, the Pediatric Risk of Mortality (PRISM), and PRISM III in Australia and New Zealand. DESIGN: A two-phase prospective observational study. Phase 1 assessed the performance of PIM, PRISM, and PRISM III between 1997 and 1999. Phase 2 assessed PIM2 in 2000 and 2001. SETTING: Ten intensive care units in Australia and New Zealand. PATIENTS: Included in the study were 26,966 patients aged <16 yrs; 1,147 patients died in the intensive care unit. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Discrimination between death and survival was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic plot for each model. The areas (95% confidence interval) for PIM, PIM2, PRISM, and PRISM III were 0.89 (0.88-0.90), 0.90 (0.88-0.91), 0.90 (0.89-0.91), and 0.93 (0.92-0.94). The calibration of the models was assessed by comparing the number of observed to predicted deaths in different diagnostic and risk groups.Prediction was best using PIM2 with no difference between observed and expected mortality (standardized mortality ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.97 [0.86-1.05]). PIM, PRISM III, and PRISM all overpredicted death, predicting 116%, 130%, and 189% of observed deaths, respectively. The performance of individual units was compared during phase 1, using PIM, PRISM, and PRISM III. There was agreement between the models in the identification of outlying units; two units performed better than expected and one unit worse than expected for each model. CONCLUSIONS: Of the models tested, PIM2 was the most accurate and had the best fit in different diagnostic and risk groups; therefore, it is the most suitable mortality prediction model to use for monitoring the quality of pediatric intensive care in Australia and New Zealand. More information about the performance of the models in other regions is required before these results can be generalized.
机译:目的:比较澳大利亚和新西兰的儿童死亡率指数(PIM),PIM2,儿童死亡风险(PRISM)和PRISM III的表现。设计:两阶段的前瞻性观察研究。第一阶段评估了1997年至1999年间PIM,PRISM和PRISM III的绩效。第二阶段评估了2000年至2001年的PIM2。背景:澳大利亚和新西兰的十个重症监护病房。患者:本研究中包括26966名年龄<16岁的患者;年龄在16岁以下的患者。重症监护病房有1147名患者死亡。干预措施:无。测量和主要结果:通过计算每种模型的接收器工作特性图下的面积,评估了死亡和生存之间的区别。 PIM,PIM2,PRISM和PRISM III的区域(95%置信区间)为0.89(0.88-0.90),0.90(0.88-0.91),0.90(0.89-0.91)和0.93(0.92-0.94)。通过比较不同诊断和风险组中观察到的死亡人数与预测的死亡人数来评估模型的校准。使用PIM2进行预测最好,观察到的死亡率与预期死亡率之间没有差异(标准死亡率[95%置信区间] 0.97 [0.86- 1.05])。 PIM,PRISM III和PRISM都高估了死亡率,分别预测了观察到的死亡的116%,130%和189%。在第1阶段,使用PIM,PRISM和PRISM III比较了各个单元的性能。模型之间在确定边远单位方面达成了一致;每个模型两个单元的性能好于预期,一个单元的性能比预期差。结论:在所测试的模型中,PIM2最准确,并且最适合不同的诊断和风险组。因此,它是最合适的死亡率预测模型,可用于监测澳大利亚和新西兰的小儿重症监护室的质量。在推广这些结果之前,需要有关其他地区模型性能的更多信息。

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