以质量求发展，以服务铸品牌

护理学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (12): 6-10.doi: 10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2022.12.006

• 研究生园地 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于床旁简易指标急性胰腺炎护理预警模型的构建

李备1,2, 林俊2, 翟惠敏1   

  1. 1.南方医科大学 护理学院,广东 广州 510515;
    2.南方医科大学附属小榄医院,广东 中山 528415
  • 收稿日期:2021-11-05 出版日期:2022-06-25 发布日期:2022-07-07
  • 通讯作者: 翟惠敏（1968-）,女,内蒙古包头人,硕士,教授,主任护师。E-mail:798612447@qq.com
  • 作者简介:李备（1988-）,男,河南周口人,本科学历,硕士研究生在读,主管护师。
  • 基金资助:
    中山市医学科研项目（2020J242）

Construction of Nursing Early Warning Model for Acute Pancreatitis Based on Simple Bedside Indicators

LI Bei1,2, LIN Jun2, ZHAI Hui-min1   

  1. 1. School of Nursing, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China;
    2. Affiliated Xiaolan Hospital, Southern Medical University, Zhongshan 528415, China
  • Received:2021-11-05 Online:2022-06-25 Published:2022-07-07

PDF (PC)

128

赞

摘要： 目的 基于床旁简易指标,构建急性胰腺炎护理预警模型并进行验证,探讨其在急性胰腺炎患者病情变化时的预测价值。方法 回顾性分析广东省某三级甲等医院的急性胰腺炎病例378例,将建模集（n=244）的重症急性胰腺炎组和非重症组各项危险因素进行比较,采用Logistic回归构建模型,应用ROC曲线下面积检验模型区分度,利用Hosmer-Lemeshow拟合优度检验评价模型校准度;将模型带入验证集（n=134）,并与BISAP评分、APACHE II评分进行预测效能对比。结果 最终纳入模型的预警指标有心率（OR=1.040）、呼吸（OR=1.269）、血氧饱和度（OR=0.824）、肠鸣音微弱（OR=2.383）、肠鸣音消失（OR=3.227）、肺部听诊音（OR=2.185）和腹膜刺激征（OR=2.097）。Hosmer-Lemeshow拟合优度检验P=0.278,ROC曲线下面积为0.840（95%CI:0.788~0.892,P<0.001),最大约登指数为0.541,灵敏度为68.3%,特异度为85.8%。模型验证结果：验证集ROC曲线下面积0.802（95%CI:0.714~0.891,P<0.001),最大约登指数0.605;灵敏度70.5%,低于BISAP评分的84.1%和APACHE II评分的79.5%;特异度90.0%,高于两种评分的84.4%和83.3%;准确率78.4%,低于两种评分的85.1%和82.1%。结论 本模型易得易测、简便快捷,预测急性胰腺炎严重程度与公认的BISAP和APACHE II评分相近,凸显了护士床旁开展快速评估的优势,可作为急性胰腺炎病情评价体系的一种补充。

关键词: 急性胰腺炎, 预警模型, 床旁, 护理

Abstract: Objective To construct a nursing early warning model for acute pancreatitis based on simple bedside indicators, to make validation and to discuss its predictive value when the disease condition changes. Methods We conducted a retrospective study with data of 378 acute pancreatitis cases from a tertiary grade-A Hospital in Guangdong. Cases were categorized into the training set (n=244) and further subdivided into severe acute pancreatitis cases and non-severe cases; the remaining cases were categorized into the validation set (n=134). Risk factors in the validation set and two non-severe groups in the training set were comparatively analyzed. Logistic regression analysis was adopted to construct a warning model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) was calculated to test the discrimination of the model, and Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was performed to test the accuracy. The validation set was used to test the warning performance of the model, which was compared with the BISAP and APACHE II scoring methods. Results Seven indicators were identified and included in the warning model, including heart rate (OR=1.040), respiratory (OR=1.269), pulse oxygen saturation (OR=0.824), weak bowel sounds (OR=2.383), disappearance of bowel sounds (OR=3.227), pulmonary auscultation (OR=2.185) and peritoneal irritation (OR=2.097). the p-value in Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was 0.278. ROC-AUC was 0.840 (95%CI:0.788~0.892,P<0.001); maximized Youden index 0.541, sensitivity 68.3% and specificity 85.8%. In the validation set, the ROC-AUC was 0.802(95%CI:0.714~0.891,P<0.001), and maximized Youden index 0.605. The sensitivity (70.5% vs 84.1% vs 79.5%) and accuracy (78.4% vs 85.1% vs 82.1%) were lower than those by BISAP and APACHE II scoring methods, while the specificity was higher (90.0% vs 84.4% vs 83.3%). Conclusion The model in the study is easy to establish and convenient and exhibits good performance equivalent to the recognized BISAP and APACHE II scores in predicting acute pancreatitis severity. It also shows advantages in rapid bedside evaluation, and can be a supplement to evaluation system of acute pancreatitis.

Key words: acute pancreatitis, warning model, rapid bedside care, nursing

中图分类号: 

  • R473
[1] Gezer NS, Bengi G, Baran A, et al.Comparison of Radiological Scoring S-ystems, Clinicalscores, Neutrophil-lymphocyte Ratio and Serum C-reactive Protein Level for Severity and Mortality Inacute Pancreatitis[J]. Rev AssocMed Bras (1992). 2020,66(6):762-770. DOI:10.1590/1806-9282.66.6.762.
[2] Yasuda H, Horibe M, Sanui M, et al.Etiologyand Mortality in Severe Acu-te Pancreatitis: Amulticenter Study in Japan[J]. Pancreatology,2020,20(3):307-317. DOI:10.1016/j.pan.2020.03.001.
[3] Crockett SD, Wani S, Gardner TB, et al.American Gastroenterological Ass-ociation Institute Guideline on Initial Management of AcutePancreatitis[J]. Gastroenterolog,2018,154(4):1096-1101. DOI:10.1053/j.gastro.2018.01.032.
[4] Hagjer S, Kumar N.Evaluation of the BISAP Scoring System in Prognost-ication of Acute Pancreatitis-A Prospective Observational Study[J]. Int J Su-rg,2018,54(Pt A):76-81. DOI:10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.04.026.
[5] 中华医学会消化病学分会胰腺疾病学组.中国急性胰腺炎诊治指南(2019,沈阳)[J].中华胰腺病杂志,2019,19(5):321-331.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-1935.2019.05.001.
[6] 高永祥,张晋昕.Logistic回归分析的样本量确定[J].循证医学,2018,12(2):122-124.DOI:10.12019/j.issn.1671-5144.2018.02.015.
[7] 张洋,胡继盛, 孙备.重症急性胰腺炎器官功能维护重要性及实施方案[J].临床外科杂志,2019, 27(12):1015-1017. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-6483.2019.12.001.
[8] Tan C, Yang L, Shi F, et al.Early Systemic Inflammatory Response Synd-rome Duration Predicts Infected Pancreatic Necrosis[J]. J Gastrointest Surg,2020,24(3):590-597. DOI:10.1007/s11605-019-04149-5.
[9] 陈其奎. 急性胰腺炎与全身炎性反应综合征、多器官功能衰竭的关系及其防治策略[J].中华消化杂志,2016,36(10):656-658. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-1432.2016.10.005.
[10] 何文华,郑西,祝荫,等.基于大样本数据库比较APACHE II、Ranson、BISAP和CTSI评分在早期预测急性胰腺炎病情严重程度的价值[J].中华胰腺病杂志,2019,19(3):172-176. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-1935.2019.03.004.
[11] 王兴鹏,曾悦.肠道微生态在急性胰腺炎发病和治疗中的研究进展[J].中华消化杂志,2016,36(10):658-661. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-1432.2016.10.005.
[12] 马小华,李兰,金涛,等.入院时无害性急性胰腺炎评分可预测轻症急性胰腺炎[J].南方医科大学学报, 2020,40(2):190-195. DOI:10.12122/j.issn.1673-4254.2020.02.09.
[13] 樊冬杰,曾彦博,董元航,等.急性胃肠损伤评分对急性胰腺炎患者病情严重程度及预后评估的价值[J].中华胰腺病杂志,2021,21(2):89-93. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn115667-20201210-00200.
[14] 旷小羿,侯惠如.基于电子病历数据的风险预测模型在临床护理中的应用现状[J].护理学报,2020,27(16):21-24.DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2020.16.021.
[1] 张静, 彭焕椽, 陈佳, 鲁永锦, 刘克玄, 侯晓敏. 成人体外循环心脏手术患者预防手术部位感染的最佳证据总结[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(4): 41-47.
[2] 刘璐, 朱钰, 曹义, 张华, 彭玉娜. 腹腔热灌注化疗患者术中实施不同目标体温管理的效果观察[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(4): 59-63.
[3] 李疆伟, 王树君, 李长仔, 胡宝山, 焦桂梅, 张卫红. 基于压力应对理论的护理干预对结直肠癌术后永久性肠造口患者心理压力、负性情绪及自我管理的影响[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(4): 64-69.
[4] 龚祖华, 孙丽, 谭璇, 张悦, 施丹, 程娟娟. 肝胆外科术后患者基础体征采集-比对-识别隐匿型病情变化的效果观察[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(4): 74-78.
[5] 李苗苗, 熊莉娟, 齐磊, 李敏, 向御婷. 基于Ridit分析法和秩和比法的疾病诊断相关分组在护理绩效管理中的应用[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(3): 22-26.
[6] 焦雪萍, 王志稳, 韩舒羽. ICU老年患者躁动行为的干预研究进展[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(3): 38-42.
[7] 李若雨, 刘鑫, 林萍, 陈丹, 林桦. 出院患者用药安全管理的最佳证据总结[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(3): 50-55.
[8] 杨小娟, 毛孝容, 王静, 江华, 李蓉, 樊宇, 文青, 李林章, 陈晓容. 成人重度烧伤患者早期肠内营养管理的最佳证据总结[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(3): 56-61.
[9] 朱天顺, 朱可可, 薛会元, 焦聪聪, 魏长慧, 王贺. 信息框架效应理论在健康管理领域应用的范围综述[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(2): 44-49.
[10] 刘硕怡, 熊莉娟, 李凌, 王玉梅, 何嘉, 李鑫, 袁淑蕾, 郭雪琴, 王暘婧, 张慧娟. 老年住院患者衰弱预防及管理临床实践指南的质量评价及内容分析[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(2): 50-55.
[11] 闫亚铃, 乐美妮, 姚桃琴, 王雪莲, 姜建玲, 辛艺. 老年胃肠肿瘤患者围手术期衰弱管理方案的构建[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(2): 74-78.
[12] 顾妍鑫, 刘丽, 胡惠惠, 周芳, 杨怡, 高锐, 王培双. 以核心能力为导向的麻醉护理硕士专业学位研究生临床实践培养方案的构建[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(1): 7-12.
[13] 孙娟, 李亚莉, 马安娜, 王华, 张会敏. 护理研究生对社区护理实践思政教学体验的质性研究[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(1): 19-23.
[14] 李格格, 王婉儿, 蒲江锋, 谢章浩, 杨妞, 黄惠根. 基于熵权-TOPSIS结合RSR法广东省护理人力资源配置评价研究[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(1): 29-33.
[15] 贺芳, 温秀兰, 林艳, 孙黎, 王晓杰, 余欣, 刘会, 郭晓萍, 周艳. 基于移动医疗的新生儿护理线上咨询门诊的建立与实施[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(9): 20-23.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
No Suggested Reading articles found!