عنوان مقاله :
Pulmonary embolism risk assessment: application of the Revised Geneva Score in an emergency department
عنوان به زبان ديگر :
بررسي خطر آمبولي ريه: كاربرد معيار جنواي بازنگري شده در بخش اورژانس
پديد آورندگان :
Chiara، Gallione Department of Translational Medicine - University of Eastern Piedmont - Maggiore Della Carità University Hospital - Novara, Italy , Alberto، Dal Molin Biella Hospital - University of Eastern Piedmont – Novara, Italy , Gian، Carlo Avanzi University of Eastern Piedmont - Director of Emergency Room - Emergency Department - Maggiore Della Carità University Hospital - Novara, Italy
كليدواژه :
Pulmonary Embolism , Risk Assessment , Nursing , Emergency Service , Hospital
چكيده فارسي :
فاقد چكيده مي باشد.
چكيده لاتين :
Aims: The Revised Geneva Score (RGS), a standardized Clinical Prediction Rule for Pulmonary Embolism (PE), was recently developed. We have measured its predictive accuracy, performing an external retrospective validation in a cohort of Emergency Department (ED) patients, filtered by
symptomatology and not by clinical suspicion, to allow its use in nursing
practice.
Methods: The clinical probability of PE was assessed in 1013 consecutive
patients with symptoms of “chest pain” or “shortness of breath/dyspnea”,
whose clinical records were obtained during a two months period, in an Italian
ED. The accuracy of RGS was analyzed by the Receiver Operating
Characteristic (ROC) analyses; the or was evaluated with an analysis of the
risk raw score.
Results: The overall prevalence of PE was 1.09%. The prevalences of PE in the
three probability categories were similar and not statistically significant. The
Area under the Curve was 0.6373 (CI 0.4336-0.8409). However, the NPV was
0.993 (95% CI 0.981-0.998) and the mean score of risk was 3.36 for the 1002
not affected by PE and 5.73 for the 11 subjects with Pulmonary Embolism (p
0.0003), by exclusively assessing it on the raw score obtained.
Conclusions: This study suggests that the performance of the RGS, modified in
order to be applied to a nursing emergency approach, gives good results in
NPV; it should be also tested to assess the embolic risk by a dichotomous
numerical score (rule-in/rule-out), that should be used to supplement rather than as a substitute for clinical judgement.
عنوان نشريه :
پرستاري مراقبتهاي ويژه