Literature DB >> 29512139

Should impaired mobility on presentation be a vital sign?

M Brabrand1,2, J Kellett1, M Opio3, T Cooksley4, C H Nickel5.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Vital signs are routinely used to assess acutely ill patients, but they do not detect all patients at risk of death. This retrospective multicenter cohort study compares the prediction of death by impaired mobility with age, co-morbidities, and vital sign changes.
METHODS: On first assessment, patients from a combined cohort of 9684 Danish and Irish patients and a separate cohort of 1010 Ugandan patients were stratified by impaired mobility on presentation (IMOP), vital sign changes assessed by the National Early Warning Score (NEWS), the Charlson Co-morbidity Index, and age.
RESULTS: Fourteen percent of Danish and Irish patients had IMOP compared with 42% of Ugandan patients. The odds ratios of IMOP for 7-day mortality were similar for both cohorts (i.e. 11.8, 95% CI 5.8-24.0 for Ugandan patients versus 6.7, 95% CI 5.0-9.0 for Danish and Irish patients). Univariate analysis of Ugandan patients showed that none of the parameters tested (i.e. low blood pressure, pulse, elevated respiratory rate, hypothermia, low oxygen saturation, old age, and coma) had a statistically higher odds ratio for either 7-day mortality than IMOP. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of Danish and Irish patients also showed that none of these parameters or the Charlson Co-morbidity Index had a statistically higher odds ratio than IMOP for either 7-day or 30-day mortality.
CONCLUSION: Immobility on presentation is a vital sign and predicts mortality for acutely ill patients independently of the traditional vital signs, age, and co-morbidities.
© 2018 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29512139     DOI: 10.1111/aas.13098

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand        ISSN: 0001-5172            Impact factor:   2.105


  5 in total

1.  QRS voltage is a predictor of in-hospital mortality of acutely ill medical patients.

Authors:  John Kellett; Martin Otyek Opio
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2018-08-17       Impact factor: 2.882

2.  Do different patient populations need different early warning scores? The performance of nine different early warning scores used on acutely ill patients admitted to a low-resource hospital in sub-Saharan Africa.

Authors:  Immaculate Nakitende; Joan Nabiryo; Teopista Namujwiga; Lucien Wasingya-Kasereka; John Kellett
Journal:  Clin Med (Lond)       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 2.659

3.  Inability to Walk Predicts Death among Adult Patients in Hospitals in Malawi.

Authors:  Raphael Kazidule Kayambankadzanja; Carl Otto Schell; Grace Nsanjama; Isaac Mbingwani; Samson Kwazizira Mndolo; Jamie Rylance; Tim Baker
Journal:  Emerg Med Int       Date:  2019-07-07       Impact factor: 1.112

4.  Non-specific complaints at emergency department presentation result in unclear diagnoses and lengthened hospitalization: a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Thomas C Sauter; Giuliana Capaldo; Michele Hoffmann; Tanja Birrenbach; Stefanie C Hautz; Juliana E Kämmer; Aristomenis K Exadaktylos; Wolf E Hautz
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2018-07-16       Impact factor: 2.953

5.  Geriatric Screening, Triage Urgency, and 30-Day Mortality in Older Emergency Department Patients.

Authors:  Laura C Blomaard; Corianne Speksnijder; Jacinta A Lucke; Jelle de Gelder; Sander Anten; Stephanie C E Schuit; Ewout W Steyerberg; Jacobijn Gussekloo; Bas de Groot; Simon P Mooijaart
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2020-04-04       Impact factor: 5.562

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.