本文關(guān)鍵詞： 慢性阻塞性肺疾病 機(jī)械通氣 慢性呼吸系統(tǒng)早期預(yù)警評(píng)分 BAP-評(píng)分　出處：《山東醫(yī)藥》2017年07期 　論文類(lèi)型：期刊論文

【摘要】：目的探討慢性呼吸系統(tǒng)早期預(yù)警評(píng)分(CREWS)與BAP-65評(píng)分對(duì)普通住院病房慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期(AECOPD)患者是否需要機(jī)械通氣(MV)的預(yù)測(cè)效能。方法選擇211例普通住院病房AECOPD患者,根據(jù)治療過(guò)程中是否需要MV分為行MV者(觀察組)和未行MV者(對(duì)照組)。于入院24 h內(nèi)對(duì)211例納入者進(jìn)行CREWS、BAP-65評(píng)分,觀察CREWS、BAP-65評(píng)分對(duì)AECOPD患者是否需要MV治療的預(yù)測(cè)效能。結(jié)果觀察組和對(duì)照組CREWS分別為(5.91±2.67)、(3.39±1.74)分,兩組相比,P0.05。觀察組BAP-65評(píng)分等級(jí)為Ⅰ級(jí)7例、Ⅱ級(jí)19例、Ⅲ級(jí)15例、Ⅳ級(jí)4例、Ⅴ級(jí)0例,對(duì)照組分別為31、97、36、2、0例,兩組相比,P0.05。CREWS、BAP-65評(píng)分預(yù)測(cè)AECOPD患者是否需要MV的ROC曲線下面積(AUROC)分別為0.779與0.598。兩種評(píng)分的AUROC分別與AUROC=0.5比較,P均0.05。CREWS預(yù)測(cè)普通住院病房AECOPD患者行MV的AUROC明顯高于BAP-65評(píng)分的AUROC,P0.05。CREWS預(yù)測(cè)患者是否需要MV的最佳截?cái)帱c(diǎn)為5分,靈敏度為51.11%,特異度為86.75%;BAP-65評(píng)分預(yù)測(cè)患者是否需要MV的最佳截?cái)帱c(diǎn)為Ⅱ級(jí),靈敏度為42.22%,特異度為77.11%。結(jié)論 CREWS、BAP-65評(píng)分均可用于預(yù)測(cè)普通住院病房AECOPD患者是否需要MV治療,但CREWS對(duì)普通住院病房AECOPD患者是否需要MV的預(yù)測(cè)效能優(yōu)于BAP-65評(píng)分。
[Abstract]:Objective to investigate the predictive effect of chronic respiratory early warning score (CREWS) and BAP-65 score on the need of mechanical ventilation in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in general inpatients. According to whether MV was needed in the course of treatment, the patients were divided into two groups: the observation group and the control group. Within 24 hours after admission, 211 patients were assessed with CREWS+ BAP-65. Results the scores of CREWS in the observation group and the control group were 5.91 鹵2.67 and 3.39 鹵1.74, respectively, compared with the control group (P 0.05). The BAP-65 score of the observation group was grade 鈪，

本文編號(hào)：1538295