Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jan 18;25(1):29.
doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-03408-1.

Development and validation of new poisoning mortality score system for patients with acute poisoning at the emergency department

Kap Su Han #  1 , Su Jin Kim #  1 , Eui Jung Lee  1 , Joong Ho Shin  1 , Ji Sung Lee  2 , Sung Woo Lee  3
Affiliations

Development and validation of new poisoning mortality score system for patients with acute poisoning at the emergency department

Kap Su Han et al. Crit Care. .

Abstract

Background: A prediction model of mortality for patients with acute poisoning has to consider both poisoning-related characteristics and patients' physiological conditions; moreover, it must be applicable to patients of all ages. This study aimed to develop a scoring system for predicting in-hospital mortality of patients with acute poisoning at the emergency department (ED).

Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of the Injury Surveillance Cohort generated by the Korea Center for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC) during 2011-2018. We developed the new-Poisoning Mortality Scoring system (new-PMS) to generate a prediction model using the derivation group (2011-2017 KCDC cohort). Points were computed for categories of each variable. The sum of these points was the new-PMS. The validation group (2018 KCDC cohort) was subjected to external temporal validation. The performance of new-PMS in predicting mortality was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for both the groups.

Results: Of 57,326 poisoning cases, 42,568 were selected. Of these, 34,352 (80.7%) and 8216 (19.3%) were enrolled in the derivation and validation groups, respectively. The new-PMS was the sum of the points for each category of 10 predictors. The possible range of the new-PMS was 0-137 points. Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test showed adequate calibration for the new-PMS with p values of 0.093 and 0.768 in the derivation and validation groups, respectively. AUROCs of the new-PMS were 0.941 (95% CI 0.934-0.949, p < 0.001) and 0.946 (95% CI 0.929-0.964, p < 0.001) in the derivation and validation groups, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the new-PMS (cutoff value: 49 points) were 86.4%, 87.2%, and 87.2% and 85.9%, 89.5%, and 89.4% in the derivation and validation groups, respectively.

Conclusions: We developed a new-PMS system based on demographic, poisoning-related variables, and vital signs observed among patients at the ED. The new-PMS showed good performance for predicting in-hospital mortality in both the derivation and validation groups. The probability of death increased according to the increase in the new-PMS. The new-PMS accurately predicted the probability of death for patients with acute poisoning. This could contribute to clinical decision making for patients with acute poisoning at the ED.

Keywords: Mortality; Poisoning; Prediction; Scoring system; Validation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests. Neither the entire paper nor any part of its contents have been published or accepted by another journal. The paper has not been submitted in its entirety, or in part, to any other journal.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Selection of study patients. PMS poisoning mortality score
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
AUROCs of the new-PMS for predicting in-hospital mortality in the derivation (a) and validation groups (b). AUROC area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, PMS poisoning mortality score
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Persson HE, Sjöberg GK, Haines JA, Pronczuk de Garbino J. Poisoning severity score. Grading of acute poisoning. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 1998;36(3):205–213. doi: 10.3109/15563659809028940. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lionte C, Sorodoc V, Jaba E, Botezat A. Development and validation of a risk-prediction nomogram for in-hospital mortality in adults poisoned with drugs and nonpharmaceutical agents: an observational study. Medicine. 2017;96(12):e6404. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000006404. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cheung R, Hoffman RS, Vlahov D, Manini AF. Prognostic utility of initial lactate in patients with acute drug overdose: a validation cohort. Ann Emerg Med. 2018;72(1):16–23. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.02.022. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schwarz ES, Kopec KT, Wiegand TJ, Wax PM, Brent J. Should we be using the poisoning severity score? J Med Toxicol. 2017;13(2):135–145. doi: 10.1007/s13181-017-0609-5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Alizadeh AM, Hassanian-Moghaddam H, Shadnia S, Zamani N, Mehrpour O. Simplified acute physiology score ii/acute physiology and chronic health evaluation ii and prediction of the mortality and later development of complications in poisoned patients admitted to intensive care unit. Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2014;115(3):297–300. doi: 10.1111/bcpt.12210. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types