切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华卫生应急电子杂志 ›› 2025, Vol. 11 ›› Issue (01) : 6 -9. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9133.2025.01.002

论著

院前休克指数对创伤患者预后预测价值分析
吴敏1, 陈志刚1, 邱晨1,(), 樊冬雪1   
  1. 1. 212003 江苏镇江,镇江市急救中心急救科
  • 收稿日期:2025-01-20 出版日期:2025-02-18
  • 通信作者: 邱晨
  • 基金资助:
    镇江市社会发展指导性项目(FZ2023096)

Predictive value of pre-hospital shock index for trauma patients

Min Wu1, Zhigang Chen1, Chen Qiu1,(), Dongxue Fan1   

  1. 1. Department of Emergency, Zhenjiang Emergency Center, Zhenjiang 212003, China
  • Received:2025-01-20 Published:2025-02-18
  • Corresponding author: Chen Qiu
引用本文:

吴敏, 陈志刚, 邱晨, 樊冬雪. 院前休克指数对创伤患者预后预测价值分析[J/OL]. 中华卫生应急电子杂志, 2025, 11(01): 6-9.

Min Wu, Zhigang Chen, Chen Qiu, Dongxue Fan. Predictive value of pre-hospital shock index for trauma patients[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Hygiene Rescue(Electronic Edition), 2025, 11(01): 6-9.

目的

院前应用休克指数(SI)能否作为判断创伤患者风险的预测因素。

方法

采用回顾性队列研究,对2022年1月1日至2023年12月31日院前救治的创伤患者进行分析。对年龄≥18岁,符合纳入标准的创伤患者,在院前急救现场根据血压和心率计算休克指数,并根据院前休克指数评分评估患者的病情,判断休克指数能否判断创伤患者的病情趋势等。

结果

共纳入3 493例患者,其中男性2 086例(59.72%),女性1 407例(40.28%);年龄14~88岁,平均(64.5±15.16)岁。钝器伤和穿透伤分别占所有外伤患者的90.98%和9.02%,87.20%的患者由交通伤导致,其他原因仅仅占12.80%。院前现场低(≤0.4)、正常[0.4<休克指数(SI)<1.0]和高(≥1.0)SI 组的比例分别为6.90%、86.37%和6.73%。所有患者中,共有77人(2.20%)在24 h内死亡。与低SI组低(SI≤0.4)比较,正常(0.4<SI<1.0)组患者病死率显著较低(P<0.01),而高(≥1.0) SI 组的病死率则显著较高(P=0.03)。

结论

院前现场SI 正常(0.4<SI<1.0)的创伤患者,其24 h内病死率低于院前SI异常(SI≥1.0或SI≤0.4)的患者,而且高SI患者的病死率更加显著。

Objective

To explore the pre-hospital application of shock index (SI)as a predictor of the risk in trauma patients.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted on trauma patients treated before hospital from January 1, 2022 to December 31, 2023.For trauma patients aged over 18 years and met the inclusion criteria, the shock index was calculated according to blood pressure and heart rate at the prehospital emergency site, and the patient's condition was evaluated according to the pre-hospital shock index score, so as to judge whether the shock index could judge the condition trend of trauma patients.

Results

A total of 3,493 patients were enrolled in this study, including 2,086 males (59.72%) and 1,407 females(40.28%), aged 14-88 years, with average of (64.5±15.16) years.Blunt trauma and penetrating trauma accounted for 90.98% and 9.02% of all trauma cases, respectively.Generally speaking, 87.20% of patients were caused by traffic accidents, and other reasons only accounted for 12.80%.The proportions of low (≤0.4),normal (0.4<SI<1.0) and high (≥1.0) SI groups were 6.90%, 86.37% and 6.73% respectively.Among all patients, a total of 77(2.20%) died within 24 hours.Compared with the low SI group (SI≤0.4), the mortality of patients in normal (0.4<SI<1.0) group was significantly lower (P<0.01), while the mortality of patients in high(≥1.0) SI group was significantly higher (P=0.03).

Conclusion

The mortality of trauma patients with normal pre-hospital SI (0.4<SI<1.0) is lower than that of patients with abnormal pre-hospital SI (≥1.0 or≤0.4)within 24 hours, and the mortality of patients with high SI is significantly increased.

表1 创伤患者的一般情况[例(%)]
表2 不同患者SI组影响因素比较[例(%)]
[1]
高振华, 王军宏, 赵信科, 等.甘肃白银地区创伤中心建设经验与思考[J/OL].中华卫生应急电子杂志, 2022,8(3): 185-187.
[2]
王飒, 闫丹萍, 武作家, 等.急诊成人创伤活动性出血患者止血措施的证据等级总结[J].中华急诊医学杂志, 2024, 33(12):1781-1787.
[3]
郭爽, 杨旭, 向珍君, 等.灾害事故现场批量伤员现代智能检伤分类管理系统应用[J/OL].中华卫生应急电子杂志, 2024, 10(3): 186-188.
[4]
Hosseinpour H, Anand T, Bhogadi SK, et al.Emergency department shock index outperforms prehospital and delta shock indices in predicting outcomes of trauma patients[J].J Surg Res,2023(291): 204-212.
[5]
Haider AA, Azim A, Rhee P, et al.Substituting systolic blood pressure with shock index in the national trauma triage protocol[J].J Trauma Acute Care Surg, 2016, 81(6): 1136-1141.
[6]
Wu SC, Rau CS, Kuo S ,et al.The reverse shock index multiplied by glasgow coma scale score (rSIG) and prediction of mortality outcome in adult trauma patients: a cross-sectional analysis based on registered trauma data[J].Int J Environ Re Public Health,2018, 15(11): 2346.
[7]
Yamada Y, Shimizu S, Yamamoto S, et al.Prehospital shock index predicts 24-h mortality in trauma patients with a normal shock index upon emergency department arriva[J].Am J Emerg Med,2023(70): 101-108.
[8]
Haider AA, Azim A, Rhee P, et al.Substituting systolic blood pressure with shock index in the national trauma triage protocol[J].J Trauma Acute Care Surg, 2016, 81(6): 1136-1141.
[9]
Huang HK, Liu CY, Tzeng IS, et al.The association between blood pressure and in-hospital mortality in traumatic brain injury:evidence from a 10-year analysis in a single-center[J].Am J Emerg Med,2022(58):265-274.
[10]
索源, 杨书聪, 钱见楚,等.区域协同多院协作(MHT)模式救治血流动力学不稳定骨盆骨折的价值[J/OL].中华卫生应急电子杂志, 2022, 8(2): 81-85.
[11]
Koch E, Lovett S, Nghiem T, et al.Shock index in the emergency department: utility and limitations[J].Open Access Emerg Med,2019(11):179-199.
[12]
Stevens J, Reppucci ML, Meier M, et al.Pre - hospital and emergency department shock index pediatric age-adjusted (SIPA)“cut points” to identify pediatric trauma patients at risk for massive transfusion and/or mortality[J].J Pediatr Surg, 2022, 57(2): 302-307.
[1] 钟兴明. 神经重症多模态颅内压管理与治疗[J/OL]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 18(01): 1000-1000.
[2] 叶红星, 马跃辉, 张超, 兰平, 黄凯源, 詹仁雅, 郑秀珏. 内镜经鼻和显微镜经颅两种视神经管减压术治疗外伤性视神经病变的疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(06): 473-479.
[3] 王园, 戴昕吭, 余婷, 冯苹, 李雅鑫, 周霖, 肖仕初. 院内战(烧)创伤中心护士救护技能培训方案的构建[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2025, 20(01): 30-35.
[4] 李彦腾, 张剑宁. 轻型颅脑战创伤的诊治[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2025, 11(01): 1-4.
[5] 张瑜廉, 党韩寒, 张传鹏, 何昆, 陈鹏宇, 张昀昇, 王在, 张黎, 于炎冰. 创伤性脑损伤急性期细胞焦亡关键分子的竞争性内源性RNA调控网络构建与验证[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2025, 11(01): 5-16.
[6] 吕一帆, 张斌, 茆翔, 刘佰运, 高国一, 牛非. 定量蛋白质组学分析皮质酮对急性创伤性脑损伤的神经保护作用[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2025, 11(01): 17-25.
[7] 谭春玉, 吴章一, 张盛帆, 杜辉, 王清华, 王俊. 重型颅脑创伤“零通道”救治的单中心临床分析[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2025, 11(01): 26-31.
[8] 赵文兵, 朱细燕, 许民辉, 徐伦山, 赵辉. 高原环境下创伤性脑损伤院前救治的策略与实践[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2025, 11(01): 57-61.
[9] 郭瑶, 吕伟, 肖爵贤, 吴利东, 程祖珏. 创伤性颅脑损伤后MOG抗体相关性脱髓鞘疾病二例报道并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2025, 11(01): 62-65.
[10] 张琳琳, 周建新. 重症神经:2024年度进展与展望[J/OL]. 中华重症医学电子杂志, 2025, 11(01): 11-16.
[11] 刘昕, 张至君, 王绅, 张敏, 王如海, 彭丽, 张高健. 轻型创伤性脑损伤患者早期病情恶化的影响因素分析[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2025, 15(01): 31-37.
[12] 王春莹, 江永强, 韩海静, 苏红霞, 李转, 党飞, 折彤, 屈耀宁. 血清SAA、sIL-2R水平与内镜逆行胰胆管造影术后胰腺炎严重程度的相关性及预测价值[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2025, 15(01): 46-50.
[13] 张强, 孙如初, 梁璐. 困难气道生理评分对急诊生理性困难气道的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 20-26.
[14] 唐成鑫, 亢文超, 孙玉芳, 项涛, 马林. 成都市院前急救中心院外心脏骤停的调度流程及改进措施分析[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(08): 745-750.
[15] 李小勇, 郭海志, 赵洋. QSM 联合SWI 预测急性缺血性脑卒中患者EVT 后神经功能的价值[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 549-555.
阅读次数
全文


摘要