JPMA. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association · 2021
Comparison of DECAF (dysponea, eosinopenia, consolidation, acidaemia, and atrial fibrillation) and APACHE II (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation ii) scoring system to predict mortality among patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Raja Wiky, Ahmed Naseem, Rizvi Nadeem Ahmed, Vallacha Anita, Kumar Dinesh
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of two systems in predicting mortality among patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
METHODS: The cross-sectional study was conducted from November 2017 to June 2018 in the Department of Chest Medicine, Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre, Karachi, and comprised patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Dyspnoea-eosinopenia-consolidation-acidaemia-atrial fibrillation system was compared with acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II scoring system after mortality scores were calculated for each patient. Data was analysed using SPSS 21.
RESULTS: Of the 210 patients, 147(70%) were males and 63(30%) were females. Overall, 59(28.1%) patients died during hospital stay. The mean dyspnoea-eosinopenia-consolidation-acidaemia-atrial fibrillation score was 2.31±0.93 while the mean acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score was 15.8±7.2. A decision threshold of dyspnoea-eosinopenia-consolidation-acidaemia-atrial fibrillation score >2 had a sensitivity of 84.6% and specificity of 82.3% while acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score had sensitivity of 53.9% and specificity of 76.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: Both scoring systems were found to be good predictors of mortality, but dyspnoea-eosinopenia-consolidationacidaemia-atrial fibrillation score was a simpler and effective clinical tool.
METHODS: The cross-sectional study was conducted from November 2017 to June 2018 in the Department of Chest Medicine, Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre, Karachi, and comprised patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Dyspnoea-eosinopenia-consolidation-acidaemia-atrial fibrillation system was compared with acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II scoring system after mortality scores were calculated for each patient. Data was analysed using SPSS 21.
RESULTS: Of the 210 patients, 147(70%) were males and 63(30%) were females. Overall, 59(28.1%) patients died during hospital stay. The mean dyspnoea-eosinopenia-consolidation-acidaemia-atrial fibrillation score was 2.31±0.93 while the mean acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score was 15.8±7.2. A decision threshold of dyspnoea-eosinopenia-consolidation-acidaemia-atrial fibrillation score >2 had a sensitivity of 84.6% and specificity of 82.3% while acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score had sensitivity of 53.9% and specificity of 76.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: Both scoring systems were found to be good predictors of mortality, but dyspnoea-eosinopenia-consolidationacidaemia-atrial fibrillation score was a simpler and effective clinical tool.