Maria Carmen Sala-Trull, Pablo Monedero, Francisco Guillen-Grima, Pilar Leon-Sanz
{"title":"Mortality predictors for ICU end-of-life decisions: delta-SOFA and SAPS 3 - retrospective evaluation.","authors":"Maria Carmen Sala-Trull, Pablo Monedero, Francisco Guillen-Grima, Pilar Leon-Sanz","doi":"10.1136/spcare-2024-005357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>End-of-life decisions in intensive care units (ICUs) are complex, influenced by patient severity, treatment efficacy and resource constraints. This study assessed the predictive value of delta-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores on days 2, 3 and 5, both independently and combined with Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) 3, for in-hospital mortality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study analysed ICU patients with stays of≥5 days from 2018 to 2020. Clinical data included SAPS 3 and SOFA scores at admission, 48 hours and on days 3 and 5, alongside mortality outcomes. Logistic regression and discriminant analysis identified mortality predictors and evaluated model performance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 200 patients, 26% died in hospital. Non-survivors had significantly higher SAPS 3 scores (mean 51.9±11.9 vs 45.6±11.9 in survivors, p=0.001) and worsening SOFA scores, particularly on days 3 and 5. Combining SAPS 3 with delta-SOFA on day 5 produced an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.63 to 0.79), indicating moderate predictive ability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Integrating the delta-SOFA score on day 5 with SAPS 3 improves in-hospital mortality predictions during prolonged ICU stays. Findings suggest early treatment limitations within 48 hours may be premature, as patient responses evolve and shared decision-making becomes more feasible over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":9136,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/spcare-2024-005357","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: End-of-life decisions in intensive care units (ICUs) are complex, influenced by patient severity, treatment efficacy and resource constraints. This study assessed the predictive value of delta-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores on days 2, 3 and 5, both independently and combined with Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) 3, for in-hospital mortality.
Methods: A retrospective cohort study analysed ICU patients with stays of≥5 days from 2018 to 2020. Clinical data included SAPS 3 and SOFA scores at admission, 48 hours and on days 3 and 5, alongside mortality outcomes. Logistic regression and discriminant analysis identified mortality predictors and evaluated model performance.
Results: Among 200 patients, 26% died in hospital. Non-survivors had significantly higher SAPS 3 scores (mean 51.9±11.9 vs 45.6±11.9 in survivors, p=0.001) and worsening SOFA scores, particularly on days 3 and 5. Combining SAPS 3 with delta-SOFA on day 5 produced an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.63 to 0.79), indicating moderate predictive ability.
Conclusions: Integrating the delta-SOFA score on day 5 with SAPS 3 improves in-hospital mortality predictions during prolonged ICU stays. Findings suggest early treatment limitations within 48 hours may be premature, as patient responses evolve and shared decision-making becomes more feasible over time.
期刊介绍:
Published quarterly in print and continuously online, BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care aims to connect many disciplines and specialties throughout the world by providing high quality, clinically relevant research, reviews, comment, information and news of international importance.
We hold an inclusive view of supportive and palliative care research and we are able to call on expertise to critique the whole range of methodologies within the subject, including those working in transitional research, clinical trials, epidemiology, behavioural sciences, ethics and health service research. Articles with relevance to clinical practice and clinical service development will be considered for publication.
In an international context, many different categories of clinician and healthcare workers do clinical work associated with palliative medicine, specialist or generalist palliative care, supportive care, psychosocial-oncology and end of life care. We wish to engage many specialties, not only those traditionally associated with supportive and palliative care. We hope to extend the readership to doctors, nurses, other healthcare workers and researchers in medical and surgical specialties, including but not limited to cardiology, gastroenterology, geriatrics, neurology, oncology, paediatrics, primary care, psychiatry, psychology, renal medicine, respiratory medicine.