Equivalency between the shock index and subtracting the systolic blood pressure from the heart rate: an observational cohort study.
Ambulance
Blood pressure
Cohort study
Critical illness
Heart rate
Shock index
Tertiary care hospital
Vital signs
Journal
BMC emergency medicine
ISSN: 1471-227X
Titre abrégé: BMC Emerg Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968543
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 10 2020
31 10 2020
Historique:
received:
10
09
2020
accepted:
27
10
2020
entrez:
1
11
2020
pubmed:
2
11
2020
medline:
16
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Although the shock index is known to predict mortality and other severe outcomes, deriving it requires complex calculations. Subtracting the systolic blood pressure from the heart rate may produce a simple shock index that would be a clinically useful substitute for the shock index. In this study, we investigated whether the simple shock index was equivalent to the shock index. This observational cohort study was conducted at 2 tertiary care hospitals. Patients who were transported by ambulance were recruited for this study and were excluded if they were aged < 15 years, had experienced prehospital cardiopulmonary arrest, or had undergone inter-hospital transfer. Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient and regression equation were calculated, and two one-sided tests were performed to examine their equivalency. Among 5429 eligible patients, the correlation coefficient between the shock index and simple shock index was extremely high (0.917, 95% confidence interval 0.912 to 0.921, P < .001). The regression equation was estimated as sSI = 258.55 log SI. The two one-sided tests revealed a very strong equivalency between the shock index and the index estimated by the above equation using the simple shock index (mean difference was 0.004, 90% confidence interval 0.003 to 0.005). The simple shock index strongly correlated with the shock index.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Although the shock index is known to predict mortality and other severe outcomes, deriving it requires complex calculations. Subtracting the systolic blood pressure from the heart rate may produce a simple shock index that would be a clinically useful substitute for the shock index. In this study, we investigated whether the simple shock index was equivalent to the shock index.
METHODS
This observational cohort study was conducted at 2 tertiary care hospitals. Patients who were transported by ambulance were recruited for this study and were excluded if they were aged < 15 years, had experienced prehospital cardiopulmonary arrest, or had undergone inter-hospital transfer. Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient and regression equation were calculated, and two one-sided tests were performed to examine their equivalency.
RESULTS
Among 5429 eligible patients, the correlation coefficient between the shock index and simple shock index was extremely high (0.917, 95% confidence interval 0.912 to 0.921, P < .001). The regression equation was estimated as sSI = 258.55 log SI. The two one-sided tests revealed a very strong equivalency between the shock index and the index estimated by the above equation using the simple shock index (mean difference was 0.004, 90% confidence interval 0.003 to 0.005).
CONCLUSION
The simple shock index strongly correlated with the shock index.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33129277
doi: 10.1186/s12873-020-00383-2
pii: 10.1186/s12873-020-00383-2
pmc: PMC7603662
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
87Références
J Interv Cardiol. 2019 Jul 25;2019:7873468
pubmed: 31772546
Acad Emerg Med. 2007 Jul;14(7):669-78
pubmed: 17595237
West J Emerg Med. 2014 Nov;15(7):795-802
pubmed: 25493120
West J Emerg Med. 2013 Mar;14(2):168-74
pubmed: 23599863
J Clin Med. 2019 Jul 31;8(8):
pubmed: 31370356
Clin Sci (Lond). 2004 Jun;106(6):605-11
pubmed: 14759219
Ann Emerg Med. 1994 Oct;24(4):685-90
pubmed: 8092595
Injury. 2018 Jan;49(1):15-19
pubmed: 29017765
J Trauma. 2010 May;68(5):1134-8
pubmed: 20453769
Eur Heart J. 2018 Sep 1;39(33):3021-3104
pubmed: 30165516
J Trauma. 2009 Dec;67(6):1426-30
pubmed: 20009697
Surgery. 2012 Sep;152(3):473-6
pubmed: 22938906
J Am Heart Assoc. 2018 Sep 18;7(18):e007581
pubmed: 30371191
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1967 Oct 27;92(43):1947-50
pubmed: 5299769
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2018 Apr;84(4):674-678
pubmed: 29251715
West J Emerg Med. 2013 Sep;14(5):453-60
pubmed: 24106542
J Trauma. 2011 Feb;70(2):384-8; discussion 388-90
pubmed: 21307738
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2011 Jun;12(5):337-43
pubmed: 21450180
Crit Care. 2018 Apr 11;22(1):87
pubmed: 29642920
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Jul 16;13:92
pubmed: 23855337
J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Feb;26(2):192-6
pubmed: 20857339
J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2016 Jul-Sep;9(3):103-6
pubmed: 27512331
Emerg Med J. 2014 Jul;31(7):579-582
pubmed: 23616498
BJOG. 2015 Jan;122(2):268-75
pubmed: 25546050
Resuscitation. 2014 Jan;85(1):109-11
pubmed: 24056390
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2019 Sep;98(9):1178-1186
pubmed: 31001814
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 31;14(1):e0211580
pubmed: 30703160
Angiology. 2017 Apr;68(4):339-345
pubmed: 27303067
Open Access Emerg Med. 2019 Aug 14;11:179-199
pubmed: 31616192
World J Emerg Med. 2012;3(2):114-7
pubmed: 25215048
Acad Emerg Med. 2007 Jul;14(7):662-8
pubmed: 17538078
Int J Cardiol. 2015 Mar 1;182:523-7
pubmed: 25661859
N Engl J Med. 2007 Nov 22;357(21):2189-94
pubmed: 18032770