scholarly journals P5‐6: A convenient risk prediction score for COVID‐19 in determining whether hospitalization should be recommended: Kanagawa admission priority assessment score (KAPAS)

Respirology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (S3) ◽  
pp. 156-157
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sorravit Savatmongkorngul ◽  
Panrikan Pitakwong ◽  
Pungkava Srichar ◽  
Chaiyaporn Yuksen ◽  
Chetsadakon Jenpanitpong ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective: Difficult intubation is associated with an increasing number of endotracheal intubation attempts. Repeated endotracheal intubation attempts are in turn associated with an increased risk of adverse events. Clinical prediction tools to predict difficult airway have limited application in emergency airway situations. This study was performed to develop a new model for predicting difficult intubation in the emergency department.Methods: This retrospective study was conducted using an exploratory model at the Emergency Medicine of Ramathibodi Hospital, a university-affiliated super-tertiary care hospital in Bangkok, Thailand. The study was conducted from June 2018 to July 2020. The inclusion criteria were an age of ≥15 years and treatment by emergency intubation in the emergency department. Difficult intubation was defined as a Cormack–Lehane grade III or IV laryngoscopic view. The predictive model and prediction score for detecting difficult intubation were developed by multivariable regression analysis.Results: During the study period, 617 patients met the inclusion criteria; of these, 83 (13.45%) had difficult intubation. Five independent factors were predictive of difficult intubation. The difficult airway assessment score that we developed to predict difficult airway intubation had an accuracy of 89%. A score of >4 increased the likelihood ratio of difficult intubation by 7.62 times.Conclusion: A difficult airway assessment score of >4 was associated with difficult intubation.


Circulation ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 140 (4) ◽  
pp. 293-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karim Wahbi ◽  
Rabah Ben Yaou ◽  
Estelle Gandjbakhch ◽  
Frédéric Anselme ◽  
Thomas Gossios ◽  
...  

ESMO Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. e000623
Author(s):  
Hannah Christina Puhr ◽  
Eleonore Pablik ◽  
Anna Sophie Berghoff ◽  
Gerd Jomrich ◽  
Sebastian Friedrich Schoppmann ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe prognostic value of symptoms at disease presentation of advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer is unknown. Thus, the aim of this study was to characterise these symptoms and correlate them with the outcome, so new prognostic markers can be defined.MethodsWe analysed clinical data including symptoms, therapies and survival of patients with stage IV gastro-oesophageal cancer treated between 2002 and 2018 at the Vienna General Hospital, Austria. Initial symptoms as well as stenosis in endoscopy and HER2 positivity were evaluated in a cross-validation model to ascertain the impact of each variable on patient survival.ResultsIn total, 258 patients were evaluated. Five factors (stenosis in endoscopy, weight loss, HER2 positivity, dyspepsia, ulcer or active bleeding) have proven to be statistically relevant prognostic factors and were given a count of +1 and −1, if applicable. The resulting score ranges between −3 and +2. The survival probability for 180 days with a score of −3/–2, −1, 0, +1 and +2 is 90%, 80%, 73%, 72% and 42%, whereas for 2 years, it is 30%, 30%, 8%, 7% and 3%, respectively. The median overall survival of a score of −3/–2, −1, 0, +1 and +2 was 579 (95% CI 274 to not measurable), 481 (95% CI 358 to 637), 297 (95% CI 240 to 346), 284 (95% CI 205 to 371), 146 (95% CI 120 to 229) days, respectively.ConclusionThe data from this retrospective study indicate that the Viennese risk prediction score for Advanced Gastroesophageal carcinoma based on Alarm Symptoms score provides independent prognostic information that may support clinical decision making at diagnosis of advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer. Our findings should be evaluated in prospective studies.


2013 ◽  
Vol 173 (19) ◽  
pp. 1821 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gearoid M. McMahon ◽  
Xiaoxi Zeng ◽  
Sushrut S. Waikar

2017 ◽  
pp. ehw565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina L. Fanola ◽  
Robert P. Giugliano ◽  
Christian T. Ruff ◽  
Marco Trevisan ◽  
Francesco Nordio ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document