| Property | Value |
|---|
|
?:abstract
|
-
PURPOSE: To investigate the predictive significance of different pneumonia scoring systems in clinical severity and mortality risk of patients with severe novel coronavirus pneumonia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 53 cases of severe novel coronavirus pneumonia were confirmed. The APACHE II, MuLBSTA and CURB-65 scores of different treatment methods were calculated, and the predictive power of each score on clinical respiratory support treatment and mortality risk was compared. RESULTS: The APACHE II score showed the largest area under ROC curve in both noninvasive and invasive respiratory support treatment assessments, which is significantly different from that of CURB-65. Further, the MuLBSTA score had the largest area under ROC curve in terms of death risk assessment, which is also significantly different from that of CURB-65; however, no difference was noted with the APACHE II score. CONCLUSION: For patients with COVID, the APACHE II score is an effective predictor of the disease severity and mortality risk. Further, the MuLBSTA score is a good predictor only in terms of mortality risk.
|
|
?:creator
|
|
|
?:doi
|
-
10.1186/s12985-021-01502-6
|
|
?:doi
|
|
|
?:journal
|
|
|
?:license
|
|
|
?:pmc_json_files
|
-
document_parses/pmc_json/PMC7874994.xml.json
|
|
?:pmcid
|
|
|
?:pmid
|
|
|
?:pmid
|
|
|
?:publication_isRelatedTo_Disease
|
|
|
?:source
|
|
|
?:title
|
-
Pneumonia scoring systems for severe COVID-19: which one is better
|
|
?:type
|
|
|
?:year
|
|
![[This page as RDF]](https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}