Klinik Araştırma

Comparison of the Laboratory Values at Admission to Palliative Care Unit: Geriatric vs Non-Geriatric Patients

Cilt: 6 Sayı: 3 31 Aralık 2023
PDF İndir
EN

Comparison of the Laboratory Values at Admission to Palliative Care Unit: Geriatric vs Non-Geriatric Patients

Abstract

Aim: The aim of the present study is to compare the laboratory findings during the palliative care unit (PCU) admission of non-geriatric and geriatric patients and to evaluate the effects of these findings. Methods: In the present study medical records of the patients hospitalized in PCU between 18.10.2018-18.10.2020 were reviewed. The patients were evaluated in 2 groups: Group I; 65 years and older and Group II; 18-64 years old. Demographic data and laboratory values of the patients (C-reactive protein, glucose, urea, creatinine, sodium, potassium, albumin, mean platelet volume and platelet, lymphocyte, neutrophil counts) were recorded. From these values, CRP/albumin, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, and platelet/lymphocyte ratio were calculated. Length of stay and mortality were also recorded. Results: A total of 454 patients (Group I: 249 and Group II: 205) were included in the study. Blood glucose, urea, creatinine and sodium values were found to be statistically higher in Group I (p=0.027, p<0.001, p<0.001 and p=0.032, respectively). Albumin values were 2.70 g/dL (2.30–3.00 g/dL) in Group I and statistically lower than Group II (p<0.001). Albumin < 2.5 g/dL [odds ratio (OR) 2.75, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.52–4.96, p < 0.001] was determined as an independent risk factor for mortality in Group I. While the sensitivity was determined as 79% for the albumin cut-off value of 2.5 g/dL, the specificity was determined as 66%. Conclusions: Among the laboratory values at the time of admission of geriatric patients admitted to the PCU, only albumin has a prognostic value in poor sensitivity and specificity.

Keywords

Kaynakça

  1. 1. Dalgaard KM, Bergenholtz H, Nielsen ME, et al. Early integration of palliative care in hospitals: A systematic review on methods, barriers, and outcome. Palliat Support Care. 2014;12(6):495-513.
  2. 2. Bureau of the Census. Projections of the population by age and sex for the United States: 2010 to 2050. 2008. Available at: http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/ p25-1138.pdf. Accessed February 20, 2015.
  3. 3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The state of aging and health in America—2013. 2013.
  4. 4. Higginson IJ, Davies E. Better Palliative Care for Older People. World Health Organization, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2004.
  5. 5. Corkum M, Viola R, Veenema C, et al. Prognosticating in palliative care: a survey of Canadian palliative care physicians. J Palliat Care. 2011;27(2):89-97.
  6. 6. Niki K, Okamoto Y, Matano Y, et al. Validation of a Short-Term, Objective, Prognostic Predictive Method for Terminal Cancer Patients in a Palliative Care Unit Using a Combination of Six Laboratory Test Items. J Palliat Med. 2019;22(6):685-690.
  7. 7. Forrest LM, McMillan DC, McArdle CS, et al. Evaluation of cumulative prognostic scores based on the systemic inflammatory response in patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 2003;89(6):1028-1030.
  8. 8. Morita T, Tsunoda J, Inoue S, et al. The Palliative Prognostic Index: a scoring system for survival prediction of terminally ill cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 1999;7(3):128-133.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

Geriatri ve Gerontoloji

Bölüm

Klinik Araştırma

Yayımlanma Tarihi

31 Aralık 2023

Gönderilme Tarihi

5 Ağustos 2023

Kabul Tarihi

22 Ağustos 2023

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2023 Cilt: 6 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA
Sargın, M., Değirmencioğlu, S., Sevgili, A., Uluer, M. S., & Çelik, J. B. (2023). Comparison of the Laboratory Values at Admission to Palliative Care Unit: Geriatric vs Non-Geriatric Patients. Journal of Cukurova Anesthesia and Surgical Sciences, 6(3), 488-493. https://doi.org/10.36516/jocass.1338332
https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/journal-file/11303