Early versus delayed enteral nutrition in mechanically ventilated patients with circulatory shock: statistics fallacy of logistic regression model

Ono, Shohei

doi:10.1186/s13054-022-04196-6

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, PCCD decreased the mortality on IPTW analysis, which was a more appropriate method of evaluating causal inferences. 26 , 27 Although the ROC for the propensity score were high, they were insufficient to adjust for severity, and the standardized mean differences for TRISS and PRF severity between the two groups was greater than 0.2. IPTW analysis demonstrated decreased mortality for the PCCD group, including the results of sensitivity analysis, keeping the large sample size.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of pelvic circumferential compression device for lower body trauma: Insights from a Japan Trauma Data Bank retrospective study

Ono,

Miyata,

Suzuki

et al. 2024

Acute Medicine & Surgery

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimPelvic ring fractures (PRFs) due to high‐energy trauma often result in severe bleeding and high mortality. Pelvic circumferential compression devices (PCCD) are widely used to stabilize PRF and decrease bleeding. However, evidence supporting their effectiveness is still inconclusive.MethodsWe conducted an observational study using the Japan Trauma Data Bank (JTDB) from 2019 to 2021. Patients with blunt lower body trauma aged 15 years or older were included. We used propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to evaluate the association of PCCD and mortality.ResultsOf the 74,393 patients in the database, 235 PCCD group and 23,429 control group were analyzed. After PSM, 231 patients in both groups were enrolled. Crude analysis indicated significantly higher in‐hospital mortality in the PCCD group (odds ratio (OR) = 3.8 [95% CI = 2.51–5.75]). However, PSM and IPTW analysis indicated that PCCD was associated with decreased in‐hospital mortality (PSM: OR = 0.79 [0.43–1.42]; IPTW: OR = 0.73 [0.62–0.86]). In a subgroup analysis of the IPTW analysis, PCCD fitting resulted in increased in‐hospital mortality in the group without PRF (OR = 2.08 [1.91–2.27]), a decrease in stable PRF (OR = 0.74 [0.6–0.91]), and a further decrease in unstable PRF (OR = 0.18 [0.12–0.27]). Additional factors, such as a fall from a height, a fall downstairs, and pre‐hospital PCCD placement also influenced the treatment effect.ConclusionThe present, large, registry‐based study found that PCCD reduced mortality in patients with a lower body injury, especially those with an unstable PRF.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%