Comparison of C-reactive protein and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio in predicting mortality among geriatric coronavirus disease 2019 patients

10Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare C-reactive protein and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio performances in predicting mortality of geriatric patients who visited the emergency department. METHODS: The data of patients with COVID-19 and aged 65 years and above, who visited emergency department during the study period, were retrospectively analyzed. The data were obtained from an electronic-based hospital information system. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and the area under the curve were used to assess each cutoff value discriminatory for predicting mortality. RESULTS: The mean age of the population included in this study was 76 (71–82) years, while 52.7% were males. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve values for C-reactive protein in terms of mortality were calculated as 71.01, 52.34, and 0.635%, respectively, while the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve values for C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio were calculated as 75.74, 47.66, and 0.645%, respectively (p<0.001). In the pairwise comparison for the receiver operating characteristic curves of C-reactive protein and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio, no statistically significant difference was found. CONCLUSIONS: Geriatric patients are the “most vulnerable” patient group against the COVID-19. In this study, both C-reactive protein and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio were found to be successful in predicting mortality for geriatric COVID-19 patients.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ak, R., Doğanay, F., & Yilmaz, E. (2022). Comparison of C-reactive protein and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio in predicting mortality among geriatric coronavirus disease 2019 patients. Revista Da Associacao Medica Brasileira, 68(1), 82–86. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20210811

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free