Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/51845
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChutikarn Suriyaen_US
dc.contributor.authorNongyao Kasatpibalen_US
dc.contributor.authorWipada Kunaviktikulen_US
dc.contributor.authorToranee Kayeeen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-04T06:10:22Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-04T06:10:22Z-
dc.date.issued2012-09-24en_US
dc.identifier.issn11787023en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84867120245en_US
dc.identifier.other10.2147/CEG.S35211en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84867120245&origin=inwarden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/51845-
dc.description.abstractObjective: To perform and confirm a simplified diagnostic indicators scoring system for predicting peptic ulcer perforation (PUP). Methods: A case-control study was conducted including 812 consecutive patients with PUP from retrospective medical records. Each diagnostic indicator measurable at the time of admittance was analyzed by a multiple regression. Stepwise logistic regression was applied with backward elimination of statistically significant predictors from the full model, with P ≥ 0.05 for exclusion. The item scores were transformed from regression coefficients and computed to a total score. The risk of PUP was interpreted using total scores as a simple predictor. This system was internally validated in 218 consecutive patients and compared to existing systems. Results: A PUP risk score was determined from the diagnostic indicators associated with PUP: gender, age, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs used, history of peptic ulcer, intense abdominal pain, guarding, X-ray free air positive, and referral from other hospitals. Item scores ranged from 0-6.0 and the total score ranged from 0-34.0. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve shows that there was 91.73% accuracy in the total scores predicting the likelihood of PUP. The likelihood of PUP among low risk (scores < 10.5), moderate risk (scores 11-21), and high risk (scores ≥ 21.5) patients was 0.13, 11.44, and 1.95, respectively. Conclusion: This scoring system is an effective diagnostic indicator for identifying the complex cases of PUP. It is a simple system and can help guide clinicians, providing them with a more efficient way to accurately subgroup patients while also reducing potential biases. © 2012 Suriya et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd.en_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleDevelopment of a simplified diagnostic indicators scoring system and validation for peptic ulcer perforation in a developing countryen_US
dc.typeJournalen_US
article.title.sourcetitleClinical and Experimental Gastroenterologyen_US
article.volume5en_US
article.stream.affiliationsChiang Mai Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsNakornping Hospitalen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.