4.6 Article

Estimating Long-Term Survival of Critically Ill Patients: The PREDICT Model

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 3, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003226

关键词

-

资金

  1. BUPA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Long-term survival outcome of critically ill patients is important in assessing effectiveness of new treatments and making treatment decisions. We developed a prognostic model for estimation of long-term survival of critically ill patients. Methodology and Principal Findings: This was a retrospective linked data cohort study involving 11,930 critically ill patients who survived more than 5 days in a university teaching hospital in Western Australia. Older age, male gender, comorbidities, severe acute illness as measured by Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II predicted mortality, and more days of vasopressor or inotropic support, mechanical ventilation, and hemofiltration within the first 5 days of intensive care unit admission were associated with a worse long-term survival up to 15 years after the onset of critical illness. Among these seven pre-selected predictors, age (explained 50% of the variability of the model, hazard ratio [HR] between 80 and 60 years old = 1.95) and co-morbidity (explained 27% of the variability, HR between Charlson co-morbidity index 5 and 0 = 2.15) were the most important determinants. A nomogram based on the pre-selected predictors is provided to allow estimation of the median survival time and also the 1-year, 3-year, 5-year, 10-year, and 15-year survival probabilities for a patient. The discrimination (adjusted c-index = 0.757, 95% confidence interval 0.745-0.769) and calibration of this prognostic model were acceptable. Significance: Age, gender, co-morbidities, severity of acute illness, and the intensity and duration of intensive care therapy can be used to estimate long-term survival of critically ill patients. Age and co-morbidity are the most important determinants of long-term prognosis of critically ill patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据