新生儿疾病危重度评分系统的临床应用

目的　评估新生儿疾病危重度评分系统的准确性。方法　应用该评分系统对 1992～ 1996年间在NICU住院的 767例新生儿进行评分。所有病例均在入院 2 4h内根据 10项测量、总分 10 0分的评分方法做第一次评分后 :①病情无加重者隔天评分 ;②病情加重时即予评分 ,至病情稳定后按①执行 ;③病情加重并继续恶化者 ,每天评分至死亡为止。全部病例按不同分值 ,划分为非危重组 (>90分 )、危重组 (70～ 90分 )及极危重组 (<70分 )。另对符合“危重病例单项指标”者亦将指标与分值进行比较。结果　非危重组无一例死亡 ,危重、极危重组中 ,分值越低其病死率越高 ,各组间病死率均有显著差异。 10项测量中 ,虽只做 9项测量 ,亦能将 81 5 8%的危重病例和 87 94%的死亡病例检出 ,若只做 8项测量 ,则只能将 40 71%的危重病例及 5 7 79%的死亡病例检出。10项测量项目中心率、血压、pH、红细胞压积比 (φRBC)、胃肠道损害在 4、6、10分值间病死率均有显著差异。符合“危重病例单项指标”的 2 69例中 ,91 45 %评分均属危重。结论　评分系统能把所有危重病例包括在内 ,非危重组无一例死亡 ,说明评分系统准确 ;如条件所限 ,10个测量项目中只做 9项 ,亦可把绝大多数危重病例检出 ;危重病例单项指标亦能反映疾病危重度。建议条件     

新生儿急性生理学评分与危重病例评分在新生儿疾病诊治中的应用

目的探讨新生儿急性生理学评分(SNAP)与危重病例评分在新生儿疾病诊治中的应用。方法选择2007年入住我科的新生儿,于住院24h内同时应用两种评分系统进行评分,对不同疾病患儿根据得分情况分为非危重、危重、极危重,比较两种评分结果中危重与极危重所占比例,分析两种评分方法在判断住院新生儿不同疾病的危重程度是否存在差异。结果研究期间共收治3768例新生儿。SNAP评出危重患儿1960例,极危重患儿414例,共58.1%;危重评分评出危重患儿1978例,极危重患儿406例,共58.3%,两种方法差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),在对各器官系统功能判定方面差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。结论两种评分系统均能准确判断新生儿疾病的危重程度。     

新生儿危重评分在新生儿转运中的应用

目的　 探讨应用新生儿危重病例评分法作为危重新生儿转运的指征。 方法 　对 1998年 3月— 1999年 12月由我院出车转运回NICU的 177例患儿 ,按新生儿危重病例评分法进行评分 ,按分值高低顺序将患儿分～ 10 0分、～ 90分、～ 80分及～69分四组 ,分析评分分值与新生儿转归、多器官功能不全及其损害程度的关系。 结果 　转运病例中主要疾病顺序为新生儿肺炎、早产儿、HIE、复杂型先天性心脏病、RDS :危重度评分分值越低 ,发生损害的器官数量越多、病死率越高 ;各系统器官损害中以神经系统损害发生率最高 ,其后为呼吸系统、泌尿系统、心血管系统及消化系统。 结论 　新生儿危重病例评分法能反映新生儿病情危重度 ,完全适用于基层医院作为危重新生儿转运指征 ,建议评分 <90分者即宜转运 ,若无条件开展评分者 ,则草案中的单项指标亦可作为转运指征     

新生儿危重病例评分在新生儿转运稳定性评价中的应用

目的通过应用新生儿危重病例评分评价新生儿转运的稳定性,指导转运工作,探讨安全转运的方法。方法对2002年11月至2005年10月由我院出车转回至NICU并具备完整危重病例评分资料的110例患儿,按新生儿危重病例评分法于转运前、后两次评分,分析转运稳定性及其与预后的关系。结果非危重组稳定性好,再评分值增加,(P<0.05);极危重组相对稳定,两次评分无显著性差异,(P>0.05);危重组稳定性差,再评分值下降,(P<0.05)。转运稳定性差直接影响了患儿预后。结论基层医院运用新生儿危重病例评分法不仅可作为危重新生儿的转运指征,更有助于上级医院通过评价转运稳定性指导转运工作,使新生儿转运的各个环节更加科学完善,进入良性循环。     

新生儿危重病例评分在NICU的应用分析

目的　评估新生儿危重病例评分法 (草案 )在新生儿重症监护病房 (NICU)中的应用价值。方法　对广州市儿童医院从 1998年 3月至 1999年 12月出车接回在NICU治疗的 177例新生儿按新生儿危重病例评分法进行评分 ,记录并分析有关设备利用、抗生素使用及器官损害等情况。结果　 177例新生儿危重病例评分为 <70分组 6例 (3 39% ) ,～ 80分组 2 8例 (15 82 % ) ,～ 90分组 89例 (5 0 2 8% ) ,>90分组 5 4例 (30 5 1% ) ;各组间病死率均有显著性差异 (P <0 0 5 ) ,评分与出生体重之间无明显差异 ,但≤ 15 0 0 g者病死率明显高于 >15 0 0g者(P <0 0 5 )。单项指标符合危重病例者 37例 ,单项指标或评分法评定属于危重病例的组间病死率的差异无显著性 (P >0 0 5 )。机械通气、多种抗生素的应用以及多器官功能损害发生率在评分 >90分组与～ 90分组差异有显著性 (P <0 0 1) ,但～ 80分组与～ 90分组间无明显差异。结论　危重评分能估计病情的程度 ,分值的划分是恰当的。通过评分 ,将分值低于 90分作为转入NICU加强监护、治疗以及基层医院危重新生儿转运的指标。     

新生儿危重病例评分与新生儿急性生理学评分围产期补充Ⅱ的应用比较

目的探讨新生儿危重病例评分(NCIS)与新生儿急性生理学评分围产期补充Ⅱ(SNAPPE-Ⅱ)两种评分系统预测危重新生儿死亡放弃风险的准确度及临床实用性。方法 269例危重新生儿根据病情转归分为死亡放弃组及好转治愈组,比较两种评分系统预测死亡放弃风险的准确度。结果死亡放弃组患儿的SNAPPE-Ⅱ得分明显高于好转治愈组患儿,差异有统计学意义(P0.001),两组患儿NCIS评分的差异无统计学意义(P=0.091),而符合单项指标的患儿死亡放弃风险明显高于不符合单项指标患儿(P=0.005)。结论 SNAPPE-Ⅱ在危重新生儿死亡放弃风险的早期预测中具有更高的准确性,NCIS中单项指标对预测病情转归有指导意义。     

新生儿危重评分在新生儿转运中的应用

目的：探讨应用新生儿危重病例评分法作为危重新生儿转运的指征。方法：对1998年3月-1999年12月由我院出车转运回NICU的177例患儿,按新生儿危重病例评分法进行评分,按分值高低顺序将患儿分-100分、-90分、-80分及-69分四组,分析评分分值与新生儿转归、多器官功能不全及其损害程度的关系。结果：转运病例中主要疾病顺序为新生儿肺炎、早产儿、HIE、复杂型先天性心脏病、RDS：危重度评分分值越低,发生损害的器官数量越多、病死率越高;各系统器官损害中以神经系统损害发生率最高,其后为呼吸系统、泌尿系统、心血管系统及消化系统。结论：新生儿危重病例评分法能反映新生儿病情危重度,完全适用于基层医院作为危重新生儿转运指征,建议评分＜90分者即宜转运,若元条件开展评分者,则草案中的单项指标亦可作为转运指征。     

新生儿出生第1天凝血指标与危重评分相关性研究

目的 探讨新生儿出生第1天凝血功能指标与危重评分的相关性.方法 对2008年12月至2010年4月出生第1天入住本院的足月儿和早产儿进行危重评分,并检测凝血指标,比较患儿凝血指标与疾病严重程度的关系,以及足月儿和早产儿凝血指标在危重评分各组之间的差异.结果 出生第1天足月儿抗凝血酶Ⅲ(AT-Ⅲ)与疾病严重程度负相关,D-二聚体(D-D)与疾病严重程度呈正相关,回归方程y=1.715-0.005×AT-Ⅲ+0.001×D-D,P=0.000;随病情加重,出生第1天足月儿凝血酶原时间(PT)、部分活化凝血活酶时间(APTT)逐渐延长,AT-Ⅲ水平下降,D-D水平增高,各组间差异有统计学意义(P均＜0.05);出生第1天早产儿AT-Ⅲ水平下降,D-D水平增加,各组间差异有统计学意义(P均＜0.05);相同危重程度各组早产儿D-D值较足月儿增高,极危重组更明显[(1278.2±422.6)μg/L比(321.5±105.2)μg/L,P=0.013].结论 D-D、APTT、AT-Ⅲ和新生儿疾病的严重程度相关,危重新生儿更易发生凝血功能障碍.     

几种新生儿危重评分的比较

新生儿危重评分是一种评估疾病危重程度,预测死亡风险的评分系统,用以指导新生儿重症监护室的临床工作,对我国日益发展的新生儿医学有其必要性和重要性.该文着重介绍并比较了几种国际上常用的危重评分系统.与新生儿急性生理学评分、新生儿急性生理学评分围生期补充及国内新生儿危重评分相比,新生儿临床危险指数、新生儿急性生理学评分-Ⅱ、新生儿急性生理学评分围生期补充-Ⅱ及新生儿临床危险指数-Ⅱ的变量更精简,分度更科学,评分时间缩短,预测死亡风险的准确性较高,具有更高的实用及推广价值.     

Role of score for neonatal acute physiology (SNAP) in predicting neonatal mortality

Objectives: To assess the validity of SNAP in predicting the outcome in terms of mortality and duration of hospital stay. The study was also undertaken to evolve the best cut-off SNAP scores for predicting mortality in different individual neonatal conditions.Methods: 295 consecutive newborn admitted to NICU during an eleven month period were evaluated with the investigations required as per the specifications of SNAP. Neonates who succumbed within 24 hours of admission and those who were shifted to the NICU for observation purposes were excluded.Results: In general, SNAP correlated well with mortality; the sensitivity and specificity of SNAP score >15 in predicting mortality were 63% and 95% respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 72% and 92.5% respectively. Very low birth weight babies and ventilated preterm neonates had higher mortality and the best cut-off SNAP score for predicting mortality in these groups was 10. In all the other groups, SNAP score >15 correlated well with higher mortality. By using multiple regression analysis on three variables including birth weight, gestational age and SNAP, SNAP was found to show the best correlation with mortality. On correlating SNAP with duration of hospital stay, 76.8% of the surviving neonates with SNAP <16 stayed for <15 days, whereas the rest stayed longer despite low SNAP. All the 9 babies with SNAP >15 who survived stayed for >15 days.Conclusions: SNAP is a measure of illness severity and correlates well with neonatal mortality. SNAP may assist the clinician in explaining the probable outcome and therapeutic intervention needed and the cost of treatment to the parents. SNAP scores >10 in VLBW babies and >15 in others are associated with higher mortality.     

������Σ�ز���������������������������ѧ���� Χ���ڲ����Ԥ��Σ���������������ձȽ�

目的 比较新生儿危重病例评分(NCIS)与美国新生儿急性生理学评分围产期补充Ⅱ(SNAPPE-Ⅱ)在危重新生儿死亡风险预测方面的优越性,探索适合我国新生儿疾病危重度判断的评分系统。方法 对2008年1-12月入住东南大学附属中大医院新生儿重症监护室(NICU)的525例患儿同时采用NCIS和SNAPPE-Ⅱ两种评分系统进行评分,根据评分将入组病例分为极危重、危重、非危重3组,分别对各组病死率进行比较,并描绘受试者工作特征曲线(ROC),比较ROC曲线下面积(AUC),以观察两种评分系统在预测危重新生儿死亡风险的特异度及灵敏度。结果 非危重组、极危重组中,NCIS评分及SNAPPE-Ⅱ的病死率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);危重组中,两种评分病死率比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);AUC分别为NCIS评分0.934,SNAPPE-Ⅱ评分0.926,两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 NCIS评分对危重新生儿的筛出能力较强,但对临床决策无早期指导作用。SNAPPE-Ⅱ评分能早期、较准确预测患儿死亡风险,临床应用较简便,宜推广使用。     

Outcome prediction in Greek neonatal intensive care units using a score for neonatal acute physiology (SNAP)

OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to evaluate the performance of the score for neonatal acute physiology (SNAP) in Greece, to examine the predictive power of SNAP calculated during the 12 hours after admission in comparison with customarily calculated SNAP during the first 24 hours, and to assess SNAP during the second 12 hours from admission as a measure of response to treatment. METHODOLOGY: A total of 579 newborns admitted to three neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) from two cities in Greece were enrolled in the study; SNAP was determined during the first 12 hours, the second 12 hours, and the first 24 hours from admission to the NICU and calculated using an algorithm based on deviations from normal values of 26 physiologic parameters. RESULTS: All three variants of SNAP were powerful predictors of vital status at discharge, as well as of duration of stay among survivors. A five-point increase in SNAP in the first 12 hours corresponds to a more than twofold ratio in the odds for death, whereas a five-unit difference in SNAP from the second 12 hours corresponds to a more than threefold ratio. The combined 24-hour score was similar to that for the first 12 hours. A considerable advantage of SNAP was its independence from more traditional predictors of neonatal death, notably gestational age, birth weight, and Apgar score. The combination of all of these predictors improved further the overall predictive potential. CONCLUSIONS: SNAP is a useful tool in medical research and can be applied in different population groups. Its independence from birth weight underlines its added value to predict fatality ratios. Moreover, the results of the present study indicate that SNAP can be estimated without loss of predictive efficiency during the first 12 hours from admission to the NICU, whereas SNAP during the second 12 hours adequately reflects the effectiveness of early medical interventions.     

Prospective clinical audit of chloral hydrate administration practices in a neonatal unit

Aim: Chloral hydrate is generally considered a safe and effective single dosing procedural sedative for neonates in the clinical setting. However, its safety profile as a repetitive dosing maintenance sedative is largely unknown. This study aimed to document current administration practices of chloral hydrate in the Neonatal Unit, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, over a 6‐month period. Methods: Patients who had been prescribed chloral hydrate during the specified audit period were recruited into the study and prospectively followed for a period of 28 days, or until they were discharged from the unit. Demographic data were collected on recruitment, and daily documentation of chloral hydrate administration was recorded. Results: A total of 238 doses of chloral hydrate were administered to a cohort of 32 patients during the study period. The majority of the audited doses (84%) were ordered as repeating doses. Doses were more likely to be given at night than during the day, and the median dosage for repetitive dosing was found to be above the study site's recommended dosing range. Pre‐dose and/or post‐dose assessment of distress/agitation accompanied dosage approximately half of the time. The audit did not reveal any recognisable pattern of sedation maintenance or weaning process for patients who received multiple doses. Conclusions: Health‐care professionals caring for hospitalised infants should be made aware of the potential risks of chloral hydrate as a repetitive dosing sedative, and of the importance of systematically evaluating the appropriateness and effectiveness of utilising such pharmacological intervention for managing and treating distress.