摘要
目的:探讨急诊潜在危重患者应用改良早期预警评分(MEWS)和快速急诊内科评分(REMS)对病情评估及预后分析的可行性及适用性。方法:对435例潜在危重病患者分别进行REMS评分和MEWS评分,对两种评分标准在门诊、专科普通病房(HDU)、重症监护室(ICU)、急诊中治疗的构成比进行分析,并比较两种评分标准的门诊治愈率、预后评价的灵敏度及特异度,及评分之间的关联性。结果:MEWS>5分时病情危险性、患者被收治进ICU的概率及死亡率显著提高,与<5相比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);REMS>11分时患者病情危险性及死亡率与<11分者相比,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。Spearman等级相关性分析显示,MEWS分值与REMS评分间呈正相关(rs=0.654,P<0.01)。结论:REMS和MEWS两种评分系统均可对潜在危重患者病情做出正常评估,能有效识别急诊中潜在的危重患者。REMS评分诊断准确强度优于MEWS评分,但在数据获取的方便快捷性上则相反,或可联合应用MEWS评分和REMS评分。
Objective： To explore the potential of critically ill patients in emergency application of modified early warning score （MEWS） and fast emergency internal medicine score （REMS） and the applicability of the feasibility analysis of severity and prognosis.Methods：435 cases of potential in critically ill patients were evaluated with REMS score and MEWS score,two kinds of criteria in the outpatient, specialist ward （HDU）,intensive care unit （ICU）, emergency treatment than the composition analysis, and comparison of two scoring standard clinic cure rate, sensitivity and prognosis evaluation the specificity, relevance and score between.Results：MEWS〉5 disease risk,probability and mortality were admitted into the ICU significantly increased,compared with 〈5,the difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）;REMS〉11 time-sharing disease risk and mortality and 〈11 were compared, the difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）.Spearman correlation analysis showed that, MEWS score and REMS score were positively correlated （rs=0.654,P〈0.01）.Conclusion：REMS and MEWS two score system can make normal assessment of potential critically ill patients in critically ill patients,can effectively identify the potential emergency.The REMS score accurate diagnosis of strength is superior to MEWS score, but in the data acquisition of convenience is the opposite,or can be combined with MEWS score and REMS score.
出处
《中国医药导刊》
2014年第9期1203-1205,共3页
Chinese Journal of Medicinal Guide
