使用国家 PEWS 和 LqSOFA 临床评分评估全科急症儿童:一项回顾性队列研究。

IF 5.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL British Journal of General Practice Pub Date : 2025-01-30 Print Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.3399/BJGP.2023.0638
Amy Clark, Rebecca Cannings-John, Enitan D Carrol, Emma Thomas-Jones, Gerri Sefton, Alastair D Hay, Christopher C Butler, Kathryn Hughes
{"title":"使用国家 PEWS 和 LqSOFA 临床评分评估全科急症儿童:一项回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Amy Clark, Rebecca Cannings-John, Enitan D Carrol, Emma Thomas-Jones, Gerri Sefton, Alastair D Hay, Christopher C Butler, Kathryn Hughes","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2023.0638","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical tools are needed in general practice to help identify children who are seriously ill. The Liverpool quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (LqSOFA) was validated in an emergency department and performed well. The National Paediatric Early Warning System (PEWS) has been introduced in hospitals throughout England with hopes for implementation in general practice.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To validate the LqSOFA and National PEWS in general practice.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Secondary analysis of 6703 children aged <5 years presenting to 225 general practices in England and Wales with acute illnesses, linked to hospital data.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Variables from the LqSOFA and National PEWS were mapped onto study data to calculate score totals. A primary outcome of admission within 2 days of GP consultation was used to calculate sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive values (NPVs), positive predictive values (PPVs), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 104/6703 children were admitted to hospital within 2 days (pre-test probability 1.6%) of GP consultation. The sensitivity of the LqSOFA was 30.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 21.8% to 41.0%), with a specificity of 84.7% (95% CI = 83.7% to 85.6%), PPV of 3.0% (95% CI = 2.1% to 4.4%), NPV of 98.7% (95% CI = 98.4% to 99.0%), and AUC of 0.58 (95% CI = 0.53 to 0.63). The sensitivity of the National PEWS was 81.0% (95% CI = 71.0% to 88.1%), with a specificity of 32.5% (95% CI = 31.2% to 33.8%), PPV of 1.9% (95% CI = 1.5% to 2.5%), NPV of 99.1% (95% CI = 98.4% to 99.4%), and AUC of 0.66 (95% CI = 0.59 to 0.72).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although the NPVs appear useful, owing to low pre-test probabilities rather than discriminative ability, neither tool accurately identified admissions to hospital. Unconsidered use by GPs could result in unsustainable referrals.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":"e98-e104"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11497154/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing children who are acutely ill in general practice using the National PEWS and LqSOFA clinical scores: a retrospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Amy Clark, Rebecca Cannings-John, Enitan D Carrol, Emma Thomas-Jones, Gerri Sefton, Alastair D Hay, Christopher C Butler, Kathryn Hughes\",\"doi\":\"10.3399/BJGP.2023.0638\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical tools are needed in general practice to help identify children who are seriously ill. The Liverpool quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (LqSOFA) was validated in an emergency department and performed well. The National Paediatric Early Warning System (PEWS) has been introduced in hospitals throughout England with hopes for implementation in general practice.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To validate the LqSOFA and National PEWS in general practice.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Secondary analysis of 6703 children aged <5 years presenting to 225 general practices in England and Wales with acute illnesses, linked to hospital data.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Variables from the LqSOFA and National PEWS were mapped onto study data to calculate score totals. A primary outcome of admission within 2 days of GP consultation was used to calculate sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive values (NPVs), positive predictive values (PPVs), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 104/6703 children were admitted to hospital within 2 days (pre-test probability 1.6%) of GP consultation. The sensitivity of the LqSOFA was 30.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 21.8% to 41.0%), with a specificity of 84.7% (95% CI = 83.7% to 85.6%), PPV of 3.0% (95% CI = 2.1% to 4.4%), NPV of 98.7% (95% CI = 98.4% to 99.0%), and AUC of 0.58 (95% CI = 0.53 to 0.63). The sensitivity of the National PEWS was 81.0% (95% CI = 71.0% to 88.1%), with a specificity of 32.5% (95% CI = 31.2% to 33.8%), PPV of 1.9% (95% CI = 1.5% to 2.5%), NPV of 99.1% (95% CI = 98.4% to 99.4%), and AUC of 0.66 (95% CI = 0.59 to 0.72).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although the NPVs appear useful, owing to low pre-test probabilities rather than discriminative ability, neither tool accurately identified admissions to hospital. Unconsidered use by GPs could result in unsustainable referrals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55320,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of General Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e98-e104\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11497154/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of General Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2023.0638\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Print\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2023.0638","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:全科医生需要临床工具来帮助识别重症儿童。利物浦快速序贯器官衰竭评估(LqSOFA)已在急诊科得到验证,效果良好。全国儿科早期预警评分(PEWS)已在全英格兰的医院中推行,并有望在全科医生中实施。目的:在全科医生中验证 LqSOFA 和全国儿科早期预警评分:设计/设置:对 6703 名儿童进行二次分析:将 LqSOFA 和国家 PEWS 中的变量映射到研究数据中以计算总分。使用全科医生咨询后两天内入院这一主要结果来计算灵敏度、特异性、阴性预测值 (NPV)、阳性预测值 (PPV) 和曲线下面积 (AUC):104/6703名儿童在两天内住院(检测前概率为1.6%)。LqSOFA 的灵敏度为 30.6%(95% 置信区间为 21.8% - 41.0%),特异性为 84.7%(83.7% - 85.6%),PPV 为 3.0%(2.1% - 4.4%),NPV 为 98.7%(98.4% - 99.0%),AUC 为 0.58(0.53 - 0.63)。全国 PEWS 的灵敏度为 81.0%(71.0% - 88.1%),特异度为 32.5%(31.2% - 33.8%);PPV 为 1.9%(1.5% - 2.5%);NPV 为 99.1%(98.4% - 99.4%),AUC 为 0.66(0.59 - 0.72):结论:尽管 NPV 看起来很有用,但由于测试前概率较低而非辨别能力较强,这两种工具都不能准确识别住院病例。全科医生不加考虑地使用这两种工具可能会导致不可持续的转诊。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing children who are acutely ill in general practice using the National PEWS and LqSOFA clinical scores: a retrospective cohort study.

Background: Clinical tools are needed in general practice to help identify children who are seriously ill. The Liverpool quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (LqSOFA) was validated in an emergency department and performed well. The National Paediatric Early Warning System (PEWS) has been introduced in hospitals throughout England with hopes for implementation in general practice.

Aim: To validate the LqSOFA and National PEWS in general practice.

Design and setting: Secondary analysis of 6703 children aged <5 years presenting to 225 general practices in England and Wales with acute illnesses, linked to hospital data.

Method: Variables from the LqSOFA and National PEWS were mapped onto study data to calculate score totals. A primary outcome of admission within 2 days of GP consultation was used to calculate sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive values (NPVs), positive predictive values (PPVs), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

Results: A total of 104/6703 children were admitted to hospital within 2 days (pre-test probability 1.6%) of GP consultation. The sensitivity of the LqSOFA was 30.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 21.8% to 41.0%), with a specificity of 84.7% (95% CI = 83.7% to 85.6%), PPV of 3.0% (95% CI = 2.1% to 4.4%), NPV of 98.7% (95% CI = 98.4% to 99.0%), and AUC of 0.58 (95% CI = 0.53 to 0.63). The sensitivity of the National PEWS was 81.0% (95% CI = 71.0% to 88.1%), with a specificity of 32.5% (95% CI = 31.2% to 33.8%), PPV of 1.9% (95% CI = 1.5% to 2.5%), NPV of 99.1% (95% CI = 98.4% to 99.4%), and AUC of 0.66 (95% CI = 0.59 to 0.72).

Conclusion: Although the NPVs appear useful, owing to low pre-test probabilities rather than discriminative ability, neither tool accurately identified admissions to hospital. Unconsidered use by GPs could result in unsustainable referrals.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of General Practice
British Journal of General Practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.20%
发文量
681
期刊介绍: The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing research, editorials, debate and analysis, and clinical guidance for family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide. BJGP began in 1953 as the ‘College of General Practitioners’ Research Newsletter’, with the ‘Journal of the College of General Practitioners’ first appearing in 1960. Following the change in status of the College, the ‘Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ was launched in 1967. Three editors later, in 1990, the title was changed to the ‘British Journal of General Practice’. The journal is commonly referred to as the ''BJGP'', and is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
期刊最新文献
Variation in prescription duration for long term conditions: a cohort study in English NHS primary care using OpenPrescribing. Discussions about physical activity in general practice: analysis of video-recorded consultations. Impact of the clinically oriented roles of a general practice receptionist: a systematic review with narrative synthesis. Paramedic or GP consultations in primary care: prospective study comparing costs and outcomes. Exploring rural Scottish GPs' migration decisions: a secondary qualitative analysis considering burnout.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1