APACHE IV, SAPS III, and SOFA scores for outcome prediction in a surgical/trauma critical care unit: an analytical cross-sectional study

IF 0.5 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology Pub Date : 2023-12-05 DOI:10.1186/s42077-023-00383-x
Huda F. Ghazaly, Ahmed Alsaied A. Aly, Marwa H. Sayed, Mahmoud M. Hassan
{"title":"APACHE IV, SAPS III, and SOFA scores for outcome prediction in a surgical/trauma critical care unit: an analytical cross-sectional study","authors":"Huda F. Ghazaly, Ahmed Alsaied A. Aly, Marwa H. Sayed, Mahmoud M. Hassan","doi":"10.1186/s42077-023-00383-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Patients’ outcomes in surgical/trauma intensive care units (ICUs) are still challenging to predict. There has been a lack of consensus over the efficacy of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV (APACHE IV), Simplified Acute Physiology Score III (SAPS III), and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores in predicting patient outcomes. This analytical cross-sectional study was designed to determine how well APACHE IV, SAPS III, and SOFA scores predict ICU mortality and the length of stay in a surgical ICU. APACHE IV, SAPS III, and SOFA scores were calculated on admission. The effectiveness of these scores in predicting mortality was determined using logistic regression models. The accuracy of these discriminative abilities was measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The Hosmer and Lemeshow calibration test was calculated to test the model fit. The agreement between APACHE IV, SAPS III, and SOFA scores in the prediction of mortality was examined using the Bland–Altman curve. A total of 148 patients met the study criteria. APACHE IV was the only significant predictor of mortality, with a 1-point increase in the APACHE IV score resulting in a 5% increase in death probability (AOR = 1.049, 95% CI 1.028–1.069) (P-value < 0.001). The APACHE IV score was superior to the SAPS III and SOFA scores regarding accuracy, with an AUC of 0.766 (95% CI, 0.670–0.862) (P-value < 0.001). Furthermore, there was a significant positive correlation between APACHE IV score and ICU length of stay (r = 0.22, P = 0.004). APACHE IV outperformed SAPS III and SOFA scores in predicting mortality in a surgical/trauma critical care unit and showed a significant positive correlation with the ICU length of stay.","PeriodicalId":7686,"journal":{"name":"Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42077-023-00383-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Patients’ outcomes in surgical/trauma intensive care units (ICUs) are still challenging to predict. There has been a lack of consensus over the efficacy of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV (APACHE IV), Simplified Acute Physiology Score III (SAPS III), and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores in predicting patient outcomes. This analytical cross-sectional study was designed to determine how well APACHE IV, SAPS III, and SOFA scores predict ICU mortality and the length of stay in a surgical ICU. APACHE IV, SAPS III, and SOFA scores were calculated on admission. The effectiveness of these scores in predicting mortality was determined using logistic regression models. The accuracy of these discriminative abilities was measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The Hosmer and Lemeshow calibration test was calculated to test the model fit. The agreement between APACHE IV, SAPS III, and SOFA scores in the prediction of mortality was examined using the Bland–Altman curve. A total of 148 patients met the study criteria. APACHE IV was the only significant predictor of mortality, with a 1-point increase in the APACHE IV score resulting in a 5% increase in death probability (AOR = 1.049, 95% CI 1.028–1.069) (P-value < 0.001). The APACHE IV score was superior to the SAPS III and SOFA scores regarding accuracy, with an AUC of 0.766 (95% CI, 0.670–0.862) (P-value < 0.001). Furthermore, there was a significant positive correlation between APACHE IV score and ICU length of stay (r = 0.22, P = 0.004). APACHE IV outperformed SAPS III and SOFA scores in predicting mortality in a surgical/trauma critical care unit and showed a significant positive correlation with the ICU length of stay.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
APACHE IV、SAPS III和SOFA评分用于外科/创伤重症监护病房的预后预测:一项分析性横断面研究
手术/创伤重症监护病房(icu)患者的预后仍然难以预测。急性生理和慢性健康评估IV (APACHE IV)、简化急性生理评分III (SAPS III)和顺序器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分在预测患者预后方面的有效性缺乏共识。本分析性横断面研究旨在确定APACHE IV、SAPS III和SOFA评分对ICU死亡率和外科ICU住院时间的预测效果。入院时计算APACHE IV、SAPS III和SOFA评分。使用逻辑回归模型确定这些评分在预测死亡率方面的有效性。这些鉴别能力的准确性用受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)来衡量。计算Hosmer和Lemeshow校准检验来检验模型的拟合性。使用Bland-Altman曲线检验APACHE IV、SAPS III和SOFA评分在预测死亡率方面的一致性。共有148名患者符合研究标准。APACHE IV是死亡率的唯一显著预测因子,APACHE IV评分每增加1分,死亡概率增加5% (AOR = 1.049, 95% CI 1.028-1.069) (p值< 0.001)。APACHE IV评分在准确性方面优于SAPS III和SOFA评分,AUC为0.766 (95% CI, 0.670-0.862) (p值< 0.001)。APACHE IV评分与患者在ICU的住院时间呈正相关(r = 0.22, P = 0.004)。APACHE IV在预测外科/创伤重症监护病房死亡率方面优于SAPS III和SOFA评分,并与ICU住院时间呈显著正相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
80
期刊最新文献
Anesthetic management of diphallia with anorectal malformation posted for colostomy: a rare association APACHE IV, SAPS III, and SOFA scores for outcome prediction in a surgical/trauma critical care unit: an analytical cross-sectional study Broken epidural catheter: individualize your management Abiraterone, a rare cause of severe perioperative hypokalemia with unusual presentation as aphonia and quadriparesis: a case report An incidental finding of xanthochromia during spinal anaesthesia in a patient posted for lower limb surgery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1