PHI、RTS在急性创伤患者病情评估中的应用比较  

Comparison on the Application of PHI and RTS in the Disease Evaluation of Patients with Acute Trauma

作　　者：赖坤锷 钟美霞[1] 黄江平 张锡林 LAI Kun e;ZHONG Meixia;HUANG Jiangping;ZHANG Xilin(Lianjiang People's Hospital,Lianjiang 524400,China)

机构地区：[1]广东省廉江市人民医院,广东廉江524400

出　　处：《临床医学工程》2019年第3期349-350,共2页Clinical Medicine & Engineering

摘　　要：目的比较院前指数(PHI)和传统修正创伤评分(RTS)在急性创伤患者病情评估中的应用效果。方法选取我院急诊外科2016年1月至2017年12月收治的90例急性创伤患者,按照入院先后顺序分为两组各45例。观察组予以PHI评分,对照组予以传统RTS评分,比较两组的常用指标、意外事件发生率。结果观察组的敏感度为88.9%,高于对照组的57.8%(P <0.05)。观察组的准确度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值分别为88.9%、 88.9%、 91.1%,与对照组的86.7%、 84.4%、 82.2%比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组的意外事件发生率为11.11%,低于对照组28.89%(P <0.05)。结论 PHI能够准确评估患者病情,预测病死率以及转归,同时具有操作简便等优点,更适用于临床急性创伤患者的病情评估。Objective To compare the application effects of prehospital index(PHI) and traditional revised trauma score(RTS) in the disease evaluation of patients with acute trauma. Methods 90 cases of patients with acute trauma admitted to our emergency surgery department from January 2016 to December 2017 were selected and divided into two groups according to the admission order, with 45 cases in each group. The observation group was given PHI, while the control group was given traditional RTS. The common indicators and incidence of accidents were compared between the two groups. Results The sensitivity of the observation group 88.9%, higher than 57.8%of the control group(P<0.05). The accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the observation group were respectively 88.9%, 88.9% and 91.1%, which had no statistical difference with 86.7%, 84.4% and 82.2% of the control group(P>0.05). The incidence of accidents of the observation group was 11.11%, lower than 28.89% of the control group(P<0.05). Conclusions PHI can accurately evaluate patients’ condition, predict the fatality rate and prognosis, with the advantages of simple operation, which is more suitable for disease evaluation of clinical patients with acute trauma.

关 键 词：院前指数 传统修正创伤评分 急性创伤 评估 

分 类 号：R641[医药卫生—外科学]