改良早期预警评分与校正改良预警评分在外科术后患者中的应用对比研究

目的:探讨改良早期预警评分(MEWS)与校正MEWS在外科病房手术后患者的应用价值对比。方法:回顾性分析外科病房收治的171例外科手术后患者的临床资料。手术后入病房时即刻作为观察起点,通过查阅病例记录对每一例患者分别进行MEWS和校正MEWS评分,以转出病房为观察终点,资料收集完后进行统计分析。结果:MEWS与校正MEWS评分分值段越高,患者自动出院/死亡、转入ICU比例明显增加,与低分段比较具有统计学意义(P0.01);以收入ICU为预测指标时,MEWS界值是4,敏感度是54.5%,特异度是90.6%,其ROC曲线下面积(0.878±0.030)(95%:0.848~0.908,P=0.000);校正MEWS界值是5,敏感度是59.1%,特异度是89.3%,其ROC曲线下面积(0.907±0.023)(95%:0.884~0.930,P=0.000)。结论:校正MEWS比MEWS评分更能反映外科术后患者病情危重程度,是提高监护级别的扳机点;观察数据护士易于获得,值得在外科病房中推广应用。     

校正改良早期预警评分在急性中毒患者中的应用

目的研究校正改良早期预警评分(MEWS)在急性中毒患者预后预测中的作用。方法选取急诊科救治的275例急性中毒患者,分别对其进行MEWS评分和校正MEWS评分,追踪患者30d预后,通过两种评分ROC曲线下面积比较两种评分系统对预后预测的准确度。结果 30d后中毒患者存活251例,死亡24例,校正MEWS评分越高,死亡率越高(P<0.01),死亡组的两种评分均明显高于存活组(P<0.01)。以死亡作为预测指标时,MEWS评分界值为4.5分,灵敏度为91.67%,特异度为75.30%,ROC曲线下面积Az=0.899 3;校正MEWS评分界值为5.5分,灵敏度为98.01%,特异度为88.84%,ROC曲线下面积Az=0.959 5。两种评分ROC曲线下面积比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论校正MEWS评分能够较好地预测急性中毒患者的预后,值得在临床急诊工作中应用。     

改良早期预警评分用于预测急诊潜在危重病患者预后的探讨

目的 :了解改良早期预警评分(MEWS)对急诊潜在危重病患者预后预测的适用性和可行性。方法 :对急诊2014年2-3月接诊的670例患者进行MEWS评分,追踪所有患者的预后,统计分析MEWS与患者预后的相关性;比较存活、死亡患者的MEWS分值;MEWS分值对患者预后预测分辨度的ROC曲线。结果 :MEWS分值与患者预后呈正相关,相关系数为0.47,P0.05。以死亡为预测指标时,MEWS评分的最佳截断值为7分,灵敏度94%,特异度94%,阳性预测值58%,阴性预测值99%,ROC曲线下面积Az=0.947(95%CI:0.911,0.983)。结论 :MEWS对急诊患者预后具有较高程度预测价值,有一定判断潜在危重病患者的能力。MEWS操作简单快捷,费用低廉,可实现对患者病情快速动态评估,适用于急诊患者。     

改良早期预警评分与校正改良预警评分在外科术后作用的对比

目的探讨改良早期预警(MEWS)评分与校正MEWS在外科术后患者中的应用。方法分析170例外科术后患者的临床资料,以手术后入病房为观察起点,以转出病房为观察终点,对患者分别进行MEWS、校正MEWS评分。结果以转入ICU为预测指标,MEWS的ROC曲线下面积为(0.889±0.031),界值为4,敏感度、特异度分别为54.3%、90.3%;校正MEWS的ROC曲线下面积为(0.907±0.023),界值为5,敏感度、特异度分别为59.1%、89.3%。结论相比于MEWS评分,校正MEWS评分更能反映外科手术后患者病情的危重程度,值得在外科病房推广使用。     

改良早期预警评分评估急诊潜在危重症患者病情能力的研究

目的了解改良早期预警评分对急诊潜在危重症患者病情评估的可行性和适用性。方法对门急诊2014年2月至3月接诊的670例患者进行改良早期预警评分,追踪所有患者的去向。统计分析改良早期预警与患者去向的相关性。比较门诊治疗、入住普通病房、收入ICU患者的改良早期预警评分,改良早期预警评分对患者病情评估分辨度的ROC曲线。结果以患者是否收住ICU为预测指标时,改良早期预警评分的最佳截断值为4分,灵敏度70.56%,特异度73.36%,阳性预测值52.45%,阴性预测值85.68%,ROC曲线下面积AZ=0.77(95%CI:0.734,0.814)。结论改良早期预警评分可用于判断急诊患者病情严重程度,对其是否收住ICU具有中等程度预测价值。改良早期预警评分操作简单快捷,费用低廉,可实现对患者病情快速动态评估,适用于急诊患者。     

比较早期预警评分和改良早期预警评分在急诊的应用价值

目的：比较早期预警评分（EWS）和改良早期预警评分（MEWS）预测急诊住院患者死亡风险的能力。方法：随机抽取409名四川大学华西医院急诊住院患者,采用EWS和MEWS对患者进行评分,使用ROC曲线比较两者预测急诊住院患者死亡风险的能力。结果：EWS预测患者住院的曲线面积为0.849±0.132,其最佳截断值为4分;MEWS预测急诊患者住院的曲线下面积为0.876±0.124,其最佳截断值为5分。结论：MEWS较EWS对于预测急诊住院患者死亡风险有较高的效能,还可以进一步改进提高其预测能力。     

改良早期预警评分在急性中毒患者预后预测中的价值

目的探讨改良早期预警评分(MEWS)在急性中毒患者预后预测中的价值。方法选取我院急诊科2013年3月-2015年6月收治的328例急性中毒危重患者为研究对象,进行前瞻性观察性研究,分别对其进行MEWS评分和APACHEⅡ评分,追踪患者30d预后,比较两种评分不同分数段危重患者预后的人数、构成比、存活组和死亡组的评分,并通过ROC曲线下面积比较两种评分系统预后预测的准确度。结果以死亡作为预测指标时,MEWS评分界值是4.5分,灵敏度94.8%,特异度90.7%,ROC曲线下面积AZ=0.980,阳性预测值68.75%,阴性预测值98.79%;APACHEⅡ评分界值是20.5分,灵敏度98.3%,特异度94.8%,ROC曲线下面积AZ=0.991,阳性预测值80.3%,阴性预测值99.6%,就预后预测而言,MEWS和APACHEⅡ评分两者相当,其ROC曲线下面积均在0.90以上,具有较高的分辨能力,两者比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 MEWS评分和APACHEⅡ评分均能够有效地预测急性中毒患者的预后,但MEWS评分简单、实用,更适用于急诊患者。     

改良早期预警结合血糖值评分在糖尿病急性并发症患者病情程度识别中的应用

目的探讨改良早期预警评分(MEWS)结合血糖值联合评分在糖尿病急性并发症患者病情程度识别的临床应用价值。方法选取在我院内分泌科住院的糖尿病急性并发症患者,于入院时进行MEWS联合血糖值评分,追踪所有患者的去向,去向分为好转出院、转入ICU、死亡。统计分析联合评分不同分数段患者好转出院、转入ICU、死亡构成比;通过受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)获得MEWS联合评分对不同病情程度的评估能力及最佳截断值。结果 0~5分数段患者好转出院、转入ICU、死亡的构成比分别为93.57%,6.71%,0.36%,6~7分数段分别为71.43%,27.14%,1.43%,7分数段分别为28.99%,39.13%,31.88%,3个频数段患者转归总体比较差异有统计学意义(χ~2=52.15,P0.01);MEWS联合血糖值评分以转入ICU作为预测指标的最佳截断值为6分,ROC曲线下面积AUC=0.968(95%CI:0.951~0.981);敏感度为92.94%,特异度为90.67%;以死亡作为预测指标的最佳截断值为7分,ROC曲线下面积AUC=0.982(95%CI:964~0.992),敏感度为94.12%,特异度为95.65%。结论 MEWS联合血糖值评分识别判断糖尿病急性并发症患者的病情程度,具有较高的分辨度,可以及早采取预警干预、降低意外事件发生率,提高抢救成功率。     

改良早期预警评分联合创伤严重程度评分在急性颅脑损伤患者中的应用

目的：探讨改良早期预警评分（MEWS）与创伤严重程度评分（CRAMS）在急性颅脑损伤患者中的应用效果。方法：回顾性分析2020年1月至12月收治的80例急性颅脑损伤患者的临床资料,根据伤后24 h的预后分为死亡组27例和生存组53例。比较两组就诊时的血压、心率、呼吸频率、瞳孔状态、格拉斯哥昏迷指数等指标以及MEWS评分、CRAMS评分。绘制MEWS评分、CRAMS评分及联合评分的ROC曲线,评估不同评分对患者伤后24 h死亡的应用价值。结果：死亡组与生存组的呼吸频率、血压、心率、GCS评分、MEWS评分、CRAMS评分的差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。ROC曲线分析结果显示,MEWS评分的最佳截断值分别为7分,灵敏度为85%,特异度为82%;CRAMS评分的最佳截断值为7分,灵敏度为84%,特异度为86%;联合评分的曲线下面积（AUC）大,灵敏度和特异度高,与MEWS评分、CRAMS评分相比有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论：MEWS评分、CRAMS评分对急性颅脑损伤患者的病情评估及死亡预测有一定指导作用,两者联合可提高预测效果。     

危重症评分量表对急诊病人转入ICU及死亡的预测能力研究

目的:探讨危重症评分量表对急诊病人转入重症监护室(ICU)及死亡的预测能力。方法:采用方便抽样法选取2019年1月—2019年12月在我院急诊科就诊的250例病人作为研究对象,最终纳入228例病人,按转入科室分为ICU组(68例)及普通病房组(160例)。应用改良早期预警评分(MEWS)量表和急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ)评估病人病情,记录病人ICU转入率及死亡率,并应用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)分析MEWS量表、APACHEⅡ量表在急诊病人ICU转入率及死亡率中的预测价值。结果:与普通病房组相比,ICU组MEWS评分、APACHEⅡ评分更高(P<0.001)。死亡组MEWS评分、APACHEⅡ评分高于非死亡组(P<0.001)。经ROC曲线分析可知,MEWS评分、APACHEⅡ评分诊断急诊病人转入ICU的最佳截断值分别为4分和20分,两者联合诊断急诊病人转入ICU的敏感度及特异度明显高于MEWS评分、APACHEⅡ评分单项诊断。MEWS评分、APACHEⅡ评分诊断急诊病人死亡最佳截断值分别为6分和25分,两者联合诊断急诊病人死亡的敏感度及特异度高于...     

MEWS评分对重症加强治疗病房危重患者死亡的预测价值

目的 了解改良早期预警(MEwS)评分系统在重症加强治疗病房(ICU)中对危重病患者死亡的预测价值及可行性.方法 按人选组标准,选取2005年1月 2006年8月人住ICU符合研究条件的患者作为研究对象,以入住ICU内2 h为观察起点;采集相关数据,进行MEWS评分和急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统Ⅰ(APACHE Ⅰ)评分.以入1CU后90 d为观察终点,结局作为观察指标.资料收齐后,分别对两种评分进行受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)下面积计算,依据界值分别计数出两种评分法相应的预测指标,并进行比较.结果 死亡组MEWS评分和APAcHE I评分均较存活组高,差异有统计学意(P均＜0.01).MEWS评分在ICU中对患者死亡的预测分值为≥5分,对危重病患者死亡预测的敏感度89.66%,特异度为86.21%,准确度为87.93%;约登指数为0.758 6,曲线下面积为0.911 4.APACHEⅡ评分对死亡患者的预测分值为≥16分,对危重病患者死亡预测的敏感度为96.55%,特异度为79.31%,准确度为87.93%,约登指数为0.758 6,曲线下面积为0.898 9.结论 MEWS评分可用于ICU中对危重病患者死亡的预测.此评分方法简单、实用、可操作性强,适宜临床推广.     

Poor performance of the modified early warning score for predicting mortality in critically ill patients presenting to an emergency department

BACKGROUND:

This study was undertaken to validate the use of the modified early warning score (MEWS) as a predictor of patient mortality and intensive care unit (ICU)/ high dependency (HD) admission in an Asian population.

METHODS:

The MEWS was applied to a retrospective cohort of 1 024 critically ill patients presenting to a large Asian tertiary emergency department (ED) between November 2006 and December 2007. Individual MEWS was calculated based on vital signs parameters on arrival at ED. Outcomes of mortality and ICU/HD admission were obtained from hospital records. The ability of the composite MEWS and its individual components to predict mortality within 30 days from ED visit was assessed. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were derived and compared with values from other cohorts. A MEWS of !4 was chosen as the cut-off value for poor prognosis based on previous studies.

RESULTS:

A total of 311 (30.4%) critically ill patients were presented with a MEWS !4. Their mean age was 61.4 years (SD 18.1) with a male to female ratio of 1.10. Of the 311 patients, 53 (17%) died within 30 days, 64 (20.6%) were admitted to ICU and 86 (27.7%) were admitted to HD. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.71 with a sensitivity of 53.0% and a specificity of 72.1% in addition to a positive predictive value (PPV) of 17.0% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 93.4% (MEWS cut-off of !4) for predicting mortality.

CONCLUSION:

The composite MEWS did not perform well in predicting poor patient outcomes for critically ill patients presenting to an ED.KEY WORDS: Modified early warning score, Emergency department, Outcomes, Triage     

改良早期预警评分在老年重度衰弱病人病情预测中的价值

目的:探讨改良早期预警评分(MEWS)在老年重度衰弱病人病情严重程度评估和死亡预测中的价值。方法:收集2015年10月—2019年9月云南省第一人民医院老年医学科收治的69例重度衰弱病人的临床资料进行回顾性研究,根据预后情况分为病死组和存活组。对病人的临床资料进行MEWS评分,比较各组病人MEWS评分的差异,并采用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)评价MEWS判断老年重度衰弱病人预后的准确性。结果:病死组与存活组病人MEWS评分分别为(4.76±1.35)分、(1.81±1.33)分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。MEWS评分对重度衰弱病人死亡预测的ROC曲线下面积为0.925[95%CI(0.863,0.988),P<0.001],最佳截点为3.5分时Youden指数最大为0.534,敏感度为76.5%,特异度为76.8%。结论:MEWS评分对判断老年重度衰弱病人病情危重程度及预后情况具有较高的预测价值。     

改良的早期预警评分动态变化在急性胰腺炎中的应用

目的探讨改良的早期预警评分(MEWS)及其动态变化在急性胰腺炎轻重方面的作用。方法对103例急性胰腺炎患者分为轻症和重症2组,入院后第1、2天记录患者的MEWS评分及动态变化(△MEWS)、Ranson评分和急性生理与慢性健康评分(APACHEⅡ评分),通过ROC曲线及截断值进行比较分析。结果 2组患者MEWS评分及动态变化(△MEWS)、Ranson评分和APACHEⅡ评分均有显著差异(P<0.01),MEWS评分及动态变化(△MEWS)与Ranson评分、APACHEⅡ评分预测重症胰腺炎的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.733、0.745、0.767、0.792比较差异无统计学意义。结论 MEWS评分及动态变化(△MEWS)可以用来评估急性胰腺炎患者的轻重。MEWS评分简便易行,适合早期筛选危重急性胰腺炎患者。     

MEWS评分、SIRS评分和APACHEⅡ评分对急诊颅脑外伤患者预后评估的对比研究

目的：比较研究MEWS评分、SIRS评分和APACHEⅡ评分评估急诊颅脑外伤患者预后的性能。方法：分析206例入我科留观室及抢救室的脑外伤患者,并进行MEWS评分、SIRS评分和APACHEⅡ评分,并追踪其预后,根据其当次入院后死亡率,比较每种评分不同分值段的病死率差异,并通过ROC曲线下面积大小,比较三种评分系统对重型颅脑外伤患者预后的性能。结果：MEWS评分、SIRS评分和APACHEⅡ评分分值越高,死亡危险率越高;MEWS评分、SIRS评分和APACHEⅡ评分的ROC曲线下面积及其95%可信区间分别为0.750（0.685~0.814）、0.692（0.633~0.752）和0.865（0.814~0.915）。结论：MEWS、SIRS和APACHEⅡ这三种评分均能对颅脑外伤患者的死亡风险进行一定的评估,但是MEWS评分更能快速、较准确的对急诊颅脑外伤患者进行早期预后评估。     

Derivation of a prognostic score for identifying critically ill patients in an emergency department resuscitation room

Introduction

Several prognostic scores exist for critically ill patients, including APACHE II, Revised Trauma Score (RTS), Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS). However, there is no widely used score specifically designed to predict the likelihood of early intensive care unit (ICU) admission or death in undifferentiated emergency department (ED) resuscitation room patients. We aimed to derive such a score and compare it with other similar scores.

Methods

This was a single centre study of consecutive adult resuscitation room patients over one month. Physiological and blood test variables were compared according to the composite primary outcome: admission to ICU or death within 7 days of attendance. Multivariate logistic regression was used to derive a prediction score which was compared with other scores using ROC (receiver operating characteristic) analysis.

Results

330 patients were included in the study, of whom 77 were admitted to ICU or died within 7 days. A prediction score was derived using the following parameters: systolic blood pressure; Glasgow coma score; blood glucose; bicarbonate; white cell count; and a history of metastates. This score significantly out-performed APACHE II, RTS, REMS and MEWS with an area under the ROC curve of 0.909 (95% CI 0.872–0.938).

Conclusion

The Prince of Wales Emergency Department Score (PEDS) is a new prognostic score to predict the likelihood of early ICU admission or death in undifferentiated resuscitation room patients. Further studies are needed to validate and refine this potentially useful tool.     

The role of the quick sequential organ failure assessment score (qSOFA) and modified early warning score (MEWS) in the pre-hospitalization prediction of sepsis prognosis

ObjectiveMany biomarkers and scoring systems to make clinical predictions about the prognosis of sepsis have been investigated. In this study, we aimed to assess the use of the quick sequential organ failure assessment score (qSOFA) and modified early warning score (MEWS) scoring systems in emergency health care services for sepsis to predict intensive care hospitalization and 28-day mortality.MethodPatients who arrived by ambulance at the Emergency Department (ED) of Dışkapı YıldırımBeyazıt Training and Research Hospital between January 2017 and December 2019, and who were diagnosed with sepsis and admitted to the hospital were included in the study. Demographic data and physiological parameters from 112 ambulance case delivery forms were recorded.QSOFA and MEWS scores were calculated from vital parameters.ResultsOf the 266 patients diagnosed with sepsis, 50% (n = 133) were female, and the mean age was 74.8 ± 13. The difference between the rate of intensive care (ICU) hospitalization and mortality for patients with a high MEWS and qSOFA score and patients whose MEWS and qSOFA score were lower was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). Thus, the criteria for MEWS and qSOFA could determine ICU hospitalization and early mortality. Those with a high MEWS value had a mortality rate approximately 1.24 times higher than those with a low MEWS value (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 1.110–1.385), while those with a high qSOFA score had a mortality rate approximately 2.0 times higher than those with a low qSOFA score (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 1.446–2.693). Those with a high MEWS were 1.34 times more likely than hose with a lower MEWS to require ICU hospitalization (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 1.1773–1.5131), while patients with a high qSOFA score were 3.21 times more likely than those with a lower qSOFA score to require ICU care (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 2.2289–4.6093).ConclusionAlthough qSOFA and MEWS are clinical scores used to identify septic patients outside the critical care unit, we believe that patients already diagnosed with sepsis can be assessed with qSOFA and MEWS prior to hospitalization to predict intensive care hospitalization and mortality. qSOFA was found be more valuable than MEWS in determining the prognosis of pre-hospitalization sepsis.     

MEWS系统在突发性脑出血急诊救治中的应用

目的探讨改良早期预警评分（MEWS）系统在突发性脑出血急诊救治中的应用价值及可行性。方法对60例突发性脑出血患者治疗前采用MEWS系统评分,≥5分的32例为观察组,〈5分的28例为对照组。2组均进行综合治疗,观察2组患者的脑出血量、MEWS评分、神经功能恢复情况及并发症等指标。结果观察组脑出血量低于对照组（P〈0．01）;观察组总有效率高于对照组（P〈0.01）;观察组并发症发生率及住院时间均显著低于对照组（P〈0．05或P〈0．01）,观察组死亡率低于对照组,但差异无统计学意义。结论MEWS评分系统在急诊救治突发性脑出血中方法简单、可操作性强,能够降低患者预后风险,可作为院前急救的有效工具,有较强的临床应用价值。