2019
DOI: 10.1097/ccm.0000000000003897
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clinical Examination for the Prediction of Mortality in the Critically Ill: The Simple Intensive Care Studies-I

Abstract: Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
9
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
1
9
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The scientific evaluation in 50 adult critically ill patients hospitalized in CCU had a reasonable mortality precision. Like a recent study, we found that the fatal group was of a substantially higher age [ 10 ], and the death is significantly (p<0.001) higher within the first 24 hours in the elders [ 11 - 12 ], as mentioned in some reviews.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…The scientific evaluation in 50 adult critically ill patients hospitalized in CCU had a reasonable mortality precision. Like a recent study, we found that the fatal group was of a substantially higher age [ 10 ], and the death is significantly (p<0.001) higher within the first 24 hours in the elders [ 11 - 12 ], as mentioned in some reviews.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…In the FINNAKI cohort no imputations were performed. In the SICS-I cohort, predictor variables were imputed using multiple imputations, but data on Cr, urine output, and mortality were not imputed [19]. We appreciated missing Cr and urine output data by only calculating the AKI burden as a proportion of data which were available (i.e., neglecting missing data) (Table 1).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The original model of FINNAKI included age, presence of chronic liver failure, malignancy, arteriosclerosis, diabetes mellitus, systolic heart failure, or chronic immunosuppression, pre-morbid functional status (regarding daily activities), as well as presence of hypotension or resuscitation prior to ICU admission and ICU admission type [20]. The original model of SICS-I included age, vasopressor dose, respiratory rate, atrial fibrillation, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, level of consciousness following the alert, verbal, pain or unresponsive (AVPU) score, central temperature, and mottling rate scored on the knee (obtained during a one-time examination within 24 h of admission) [19].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The incremental value in knowing, and being able to follow, serum lactate would have been interesting (Casserly et al, 2015). However, it is notable that even in well-resourced settings, simple clinical assessment has been shown to be as reliable as the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-IV (APACHE-IV) and Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II (SAPS-II)-and superior to the SOFA score-in identifying patients at greatest risk of deterioration (Hiemstra et al, 2019). Indeed, even simpler clinical assessments, including the inability to walk, have been shown to have significant prognostic value in the LMIC setting (Kayambankadzanja et al, 2019).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%