医学
奇纳
腹泻
急诊科
科克伦图书馆
梅德林
内科学
危险分层
荟萃分析
急诊医学
风险评估
重症监护医学
法学
精神科
计算机科学
计算机安全
心理干预
政治学
作者
Tania Marx,Claudia Vincent-Boulay,Laurance Marquis-Gendron,Kathryn Bareil,Samuel Leduc,Gabrielle Lefebvre,Catherine Côté,Myriam Mallet,Emmanuelle Paquette-Raynard,Maurice Boissinot,Michel G. Bergeron,Simon Berthelot
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.ajem.2022.11.024
摘要
To identify tools that predict the risk of complications in patients presenting to outpatient clinics or emergency departments (ED) with acute infectious diarrhea.Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and CINAHL were searched from inception to July 2021. Articles reporting on the derivation or validation of a score to stratify the risk of intravenous rehydration or hospitalization among patients with acute infectious diarrhea in the ED or outpatient clinic were retained for analysis.Five articles reporting on two different tools were identified. Developed to assess the risk of hospitalization of children, the EsVida scale has not been externally validated. Developed originally to assess the level of dehydration in children, the Clinical Dehydration Scale (CDS) was evaluated as a risk stratification tool. For predicting intravenous rehydration, a CDS score ≥ 1 showed a sensitivity between 0.73 and 0.88 and specificity between 0.38 and 0.69, whereas a CDS score ≥ 5 showed a sensitivity between 0.06 and 0.32 and specificity between 0.94 and 0.99. For predicting hospitalization, a CDS score ≥ 1 showed a sensitivity between 0.74 and 1.00 and specificity between 0.34 and 0.38, whereas a CDS score ≥ 5 showed a sensitivity between 0.26 and 0.62 and specificity between 0.66 and 0.96. High heterogeneity among studies and unclear risk of bias precluded meta-analysis.As a risk-stratification tool, the CDS has been validated only for children. Further research is needed to develop and validate a tool suitable for adults in the ED.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI