2013PubMedRequires access

[Predictive value of 3 methods in severity evaluation and prognosis of acute paraquat poisoning].

Yu Du, Yi Mou

Open publisher page 9 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the predictive value of 3 methods, namely plasma paraquat concentration, severity index of paraquat poisoning (SIPP), and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) in severity evaluation and prognosis of acute paraquat poisoning. METHODS: A total of 73 acute paraquat poisoning patients with oral administration were collected. Paraquat concentration in the plasma and other parameters on admission for SIPP and APACHE II were taken from medical records. According to the clinical outcome in the hospital or 7 days after the discharge, discrimination and calibration test were performed to evaluate the prognosis of the 3 methods. RESULTS: Discrimination of the 3 methods was greater than 0.8, and the area under the receiver operator curve for SIPP (0.938) was greater than paraquat concentration in the plasma (0.857) and APACHE II (0.801) with statistical significance (z=2.429, 2.021; P=0.015, 0.043). Difference in plasma paraquat concentration (0.857) and APACHE II (0.801) had no statistical significance (z=0.755, P=0.450). Hosmer-Lemeshow good fit test suggested better calibration value with statistical significance for the 3 methods (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: The 3 methods are valid in the severity evaluation and prognosis of acute paraquat poisoning. SIPP is the most preferred method, followed by paraquat concentration on admission. When there is no facility to measure paraqut concentration, APACHE II can be used as a reference for the death risk in acute paraquat poisoning.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the predictive value of 3 methods, namely plasma paraquat concentration, severity index of paraquat poisoning (SIPP), and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) in severity evaluation and prognosis of acute paraquat poisoning. METHODS: A total of 73 acute paraquat poisoning patients with oral administration were collected. Paraquat concentration in the plasma and other parameters on admission for SIPP and APACHE II were taken from medical records. According to the clinical outcome in the hospital or 7 days after the discharge, discrimination and calibration test were performed to evaluate the prognosis of the 3 methods. RESULTS: Discrimination of the 3 methods was greater than 0.8, and the area under the receiver operator curve for SIPP (0.938) was greater than paraquat concentration in the plasma (0.857) and APACHE II (0.801) with statistical significance (z=2.429, 2.021; P=0.015, 0.043). Difference in plasma paraquat concentration (0.857) and APACHE II (0.801) had no statistical significance (z=0.755, P=0.450). Hosmer-Lemeshow good fit test suggested better calibration value with statistical significance for the 3 methods (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: The 3 methods are valid in the severity evaluation and prognosis of acute paraquat poisoning. SIPP is the most preferred method, followed by paraquat concentration on admission. When there is no facility to measure paraqut concentration, APACHE II can be used as a reference for the death risk in acute paraquat poisoning.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 9 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the predictive value of 3 methods, namely plasma paraquat concentration, severity index of paraquat poisoning (SIPP), and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) in severity evaluation and prognosis of acute paraquat poisoning. METHODS: A total of 73 acute paraquat poisoning patients with oral administration were collected. Paraquat concentration in the plasma and other parameters on admission for SIPP and APACHE II were taken from medical records. According to the clinical outcome in the hospital or 7 days after the discharge, discrimination and calibration test were performed to evaluate the prognosis of the 3 methods. RESULTS: Discrimination of the 3 methods was greater than 0.8, and the area under the receiver operator curve for SIPP (0.938) was greater than paraquat concentration in the plasma (0.857) and APACHE II (0.801) with statistical significance (z=2.429, 2.021; P=0.015, 0.043). Difference in plasma paraquat concentration (0.857) and APACHE II (0.801) had no statistical significance (z=0.755, P=0.450). Hosmer-Lemeshow good fit test suggested better calibration value with statistical significance for the 3 methods (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: The 3 methods are valid in the severity evaluation and prognosis of acute paraquat poisoning. SIPP is the most preferred method, followed by paraquat concentration on admission. When there is no facility to measure paraqut concentration, APACHE II can be used as a reference for the death risk in acute paraquat poisoning.

Key concepts: Paraquat, Medicine, Acute toxicity, Internal medicine, Receiver operating characteristic, APACHE II, Biology, Toxicity

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
[Predictive value of 3 methods in severity evaluation and prognosis of acute paraquat poisoning]. — Research Paper | ScholarLens