A comparison of the shock index and conventional vital signs to identify acute, critical illness in the emergency department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE Shock index (SI) (heart rate/systolic blood pressure; normal range, 0.5 to 0.7) and conventional vital signs were compared to identify acute critical illness in the emergency department. DESIGN Quasi-prospective study. PATIENTS Two hundred seventy-five consecutive adults who presented for urgent medical care. INTERVENTIONS Patients had vital signs, SI, and triage priority recorded on arrival in the ED and then their final disposition. RESULTS Two groups were identified retrospectively by the SI; group 1 (41) had an SI of more than 0.9, and group 2 (234) had an SI of less than 0.9 on arrival in the ED. Although both groups had apparently stable vital signs on arrival, group 1 had a significantly higher proportion of patients who were triaged to a priority requiring immediate treatment (23 versus 45; P < .01) and required admission to the hospital (35 versus 105; P < .01) and continued therapy in an ICU (10 versus 13; P < .01). CONCLUSION With apparently stable vital signs, an abnormal elevation of the SI to more than 0.9 was associated with an illness that was treated immediately, admission to the hospital, and intensive therapy on admission. The SI may be useful to evaluate acute critical illness in the ED.

[1]  H. Smithline,et al.  Continuous central venous oximetry and shock index in the emergency department: use in the evaluation of clinical shock. , 1992, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[2]  W. Shoemaker,et al.  Hemodynamic and oxygen transport responses in survivors and nonsurvivors of high‐risk surgery , 1993, Critical care medicine.

[3]  E. Kirkman,et al.  A comparison of the effects of skeletal muscle injury and somatic afferent nerve stimulation on the response to hemorrhage in anesthetized pigs. , 1993, The Journal of trauma.

[4]  W. Shoemaker,et al.  Reliability of clinical monitoring to assess blood volume in critically ill patients , 1984, Critical care medicine.

[5]  William C. Shoemaker,et al.  Clinical trial of an algorithm for outcome prediction in acute circulatory failure. , 1981 .

[6]  J. Edwards,et al.  Shock index: a re-evaluation in acute circulatory failure. , 1992, Resuscitation.

[7]  J. Edwards,et al.  Early cardiorespiratory findings after severe blunt thoracic trauma and their relation to outcome , 1992, The British journal of surgery.

[8]  W. Shoemaker,et al.  Unreliability of blood pressure and heart rate to evaluate cardiac output in emergency resuscitation and critical illness , 1993, Critical care medicine.

[9]  W. Shoemaker,et al.  Clinical trial of an algorithm for outcome prediction in acute circulatory failure. , 1981, Critical care medicine.

[10]  R. Goldfarb Cardiac mechanical performance in circulatory shock: a critical review of methods and results. , 1982, Circulatory shock.

[11]  J. Edwards,et al.  Measurement of oxygen consumption after uncomplicated acute myocardial infarction. , 1993, Chest.

[12]  J. Sturm,et al.  Cardiorespiratory and metabolic patterns in multiple trauma patients. , 1979, Resuscitation.

[13]  C. Bryan-Brown,et al.  Blood flow to organs: parameters for function and survival in critical illness. , 1988, Critical care medicine.

[14]  W. Shoemaker,et al.  Reliability of clinical monitoring to assess blood volume in critically ill patients. , 1982 .

[15]  M. Rady The role of central venous oximetry, lactic acid concentration and shock index in the evaluation of clinical shock: a review. , 1992, Resuscitation.