高级检索
当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

Prognostic values of SOFA score, qSOFA score, and LODS score for patients with sepsis

文献详情

资源类型:
WOS体系:
Pubmed体系:

收录情况: ◇ SCIE

机构: [1]Emergency Room, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine & Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510120, China [2]Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Research on Emergency in TCM, Guangzhou 510120, China
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: Sepsis Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (SOFA score) Quick SOFA score (qSOFA score) Logistic Organ Dysfunction System score (LODS score) prognosis

摘要:
Background: Sepsis continues to carry a high rate of mortality, which makes effective and simple evaluation methods for predicting the prognosis of septic patients especially important. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the relationships between three scoring systems including Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, Quick SOFA (qSOFA) score, and Logistic Organ Dysfunction System (LODS) score and the prognoses of septic patients. Methods: The baseline data, SOFA score, qSOFA score, LODS score, 28-day prognosis, and 90-day prognosis of patients who met the diagnostic criteria of sepsis were retrieved from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC-III) database. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were drawn for various indicators, and comparisons were drawn between the areas under the ROC curves (AUC) of the different scoring systems. Results: The 28-day AUC was 0.661 (0.652, 0.670) for SOFA, 0.558 (0.548, 0.568) for qSOFA, and 0.668 (0.658, 0.677) for LODS; AUC-qSOFA vs. AUC-LODS was 0.103 (0.087, 0.120) (P<0.001), and AUC-qSOFA vs. AUC-LODS was 0.110 (0.094, 0.125) (P<0.001). The 90-day AUC was 0.630 (0.621, 0.640) for SOFA, 0.551 (0.541, 0.560) for qSOFA, and 0.644 (0.635, 0.653) for LODS; AUC-SOFA vs. AUC-qSOFA was 0.079 (0.065, 0.094) (P<0.001), and AUC-qSOFA vs. AUC-LODS was 0.093 (0.079, 0.107) (P<0.001). Conclusions: SOFA score, qSOFA score, and LODS score can all be used to predict the prognosis of septic patients. LODS score and SOFA score have higher accuracy than qSOFA score; however, qSOFA is simpler to use, making it a more suitable tool in an emergency setting.

基金:
语种:
被引次数:
WOS:
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2019]版:
大类 | 4 区 医学
小类 | 4 区 卫生保健与服务
最新[2025]版:
JCR分区:
出版当年[2018]版:
Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
最新[2023]版:

影响因子: 最新[2023版] 最新五年平均 出版当年[2018版] 出版当年五年平均 出版前一年[2017版] 出版后一年[2019版]

第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Emergency Room, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine & Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510120, China [2]Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Research on Emergency in TCM, Guangzhou 510120, China
通讯作者:
通讯机构: [1]Emergency Room, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine & Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510120, China [*1]Emergency Room, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510120, China
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:2018 今日访问量:0 总访问量:645 更新日期:2024-07-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 广东省中医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:广州市越秀区大德路111号