http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Rungsun Bhurayanontachai (검색결과 2 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Bodin Khwannimit,Rungsun Bhurayanontachai,Veerapong Vattanavanit 대한중환자의학회 2022 Acute and Critical Care Vol.37 No.3
Background Some variables of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score are not routinely measured in sepsis patients, especially in countries with limited resources. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of the modified SOFA (mSOFA) and compared its ability to predict mortality in sepsis patients to that of the original SOFA score. Methods Sepsis patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit of Songklanagarind Hospital between 2011 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Results A total of 1,522 sepsis patients were enrolled. The mean SOFA and mSOFA scores were 9.7±4.3 and 8.8±3.9, respectively. The discrimination of the mSOFA score was significantly higher than that of the SOFA score for all-cause in-hospital mortality(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.891 [95% confidence interval, 0.875–0.907] vs. 0.879 [0.862–0.896]; P<0.001), all-cause intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (0.880 [0.863–0.898] vs. 0.871 [0.853–0.889], P=0.01) and all-cause 28-day mortality (0.887 [0.871–0.904] vs. 0.874 [0.856–0.892], P<0.001). The ability of mSOFA score to predict all-cause in-hospital and 28-day mortality was higher than that of the SOFA score within the subgroups of sepsis according to age, sepsis severity and serum lactate levels. The mSOFA score was demonstrated to have a performance similar to the original SOFA score regarding the prediction of mortality in sepsis patients with cirrhosis or hepatic dysfunction. Conclusions The mSOFA score was a good alternative to the original SOFA core in predicting mortality among sepsis patients admitted to the ICU.
-
Sirichai Cheewatanakornkul,Piyanai Vattanaprasan,Supattra Uppanisakorn,Rungsun Bhurayanontachai 대한중환자의학회 2022 Acute and Critical Care Vol.37 No.3
Background: Phlebitis-associated peripheral infusion of intravenous amiodarone is common in clinical practice, with an incidence between 5% and 65%. Several factors, including drug concentration, catheter size, and in-line filter used, are significantly associated with phlebitis occurrence. We performed a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis to find out whether in-line filter will reduce the incidence of amiodarone-induced phlebitis (AIP) in high concentration of amiodarone infusion compared to low concentration without in-line filter.Methods: Clinical records of all patients who required intravenous amiodarone infusion for cardiac arrhythmias, between January 2017 to December 2019 were retrieved. The incidence of AIP was recorded and subsequently compared among high concentration (2 mg/ml) with an in-line filter and low concentration (1.5 mg/ml) infusion without an in-line filter after a 1 to 2 propensity score matched.Results: The data indicated that among the 214 cases of amiodarone infusion collected, 28 cases used an in-line filter with high concentration while 186 cases received a low concentration of amiodarone infusion without an in-line filter. After 1:2 propensity score matching, the incidence of phlebitis in the high concentration with in-line filter group was significantly higher than the low concentration without in-line filter group (28.6% vs. 3.6%, P<0.01).Conclusions: Despite the usage of in-line filter, the high concentration of amiodarone infusion resulted in a higher incidence of peripheral phlebitis. Central venous catheterization for a high concentration of amiodarone infusion is recommended.
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
