medigraphic.com
ISSN 2448-8909 (Print)

2000, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Med Crit 2000; 14 (2)

Predictive value of severity scoring systems: comparison of four models in three mexican intensive care units included in the multicenter database of intensive care

Cerón DUW, Esponda PJ, Borboya PM, Vázquez MJP

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 50-59
PDF size: 392.46 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the performance of four mortality prediction models: APACHE II, SAPS II, MPM II-0 and vMPM II-24.
Design: A prospective cohort study.
Setting : Three mexican intensive care units.
Patients: 771 adult patients.
Interventions: None.
Measurements and main results: Area under the ROC cure (discrimination capacity): APACHE II: 0.87 SAPS II: 0.88, MPM II-0: 0.82, MPM II-24: 0.88. There was a statistic difference between MPM II-0 area and the area of the other models. Goodness of fit (calibration): APACHE II: p › 0.2. SAPS II: p › 0.9, MPM II-0: p › 0.02, MPM II-24: p › 0.7.
Conclusion: The four models have good calibration and discrimination capacity, MPM II-0 had the least advantage of the four.


REFERENCES

  1. Knaus WA, Zimmerman JE, Wagner DP et al. APACHEAcute physiology and chronic health evaluation: a physiologically based classification system. Crit Care Med 1981;9: 591-597.

  2. Le Gall J, Loirat P, Alperovitch A et al. A simplified acute physiology score for ICU patients. Crit Care Med 1984;13: 818-829.

  3. Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP et al. APACHE II: A severity, of disease classification system. Crit Care Med 1985; 13: 818-829.

  4. Lemeshow S, Teres D, Pastides H et al. A method for predicting survival and mortality of ICU patients using objectively, derived weights. Crit Care Med 1985; 13: 519-525.

  5. Knaus WA, Wagner, Draper EA et al. The APACHE III prognostic system. Risk prediction of hospital mortality for criticallyill hospitalized adults. Chest 1991; 100: 1619-1636.

  6. Le Gall J, Lemeshow S, Saulnier F. A new simplified acute physiology score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study. JAMA 1993; 270: 2957-2963.

  7. Lemeshow S, Teres D, Klar J et al. Mortality probability models (MPM II) based on an International cohort of intensive care unit patients. JAMA 1993; 270: 2478-2486.

  8. Sánchez-Velázquez LD. Capacidad discriminativa y costo de los sistemas de calificación de la gravedad de la enfermedad en la unidad de terapia intensiva. (En prensa).

  9. Cerón U, Sierra A, Martínez R, Vázquez JP. Base de datos para el control de calidad y utilización de recursos en la Unidad de Terapia Intensiva. Rev Mex Med Crit y Ter Int 1996; 10: 105-201.

  10. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982; 143: 29-36.

  11. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 1983; 148: 839-843.

  12. Lemeshow S, Hosmer DW. A review of goddness of fit statistics for use in the development of logistic regression models. Am J Epidemiol 1982; 110: 847-864.

  13. Knaus WA, Le Gall GJ, Wagner DP et al. A comparison of ntensive care in the USA and France. Lancet 1982; II:642-646.

  14. Zimmerman JE, Knaus WA, Judson JA et al. Patient selection for intensive care: A comparison of New Zealand and United States hospitals. Crit Care Med 1988; 16: 318-326.

  15. Sirio C, Tajimi K, Tase C et al. An initial comparison of intensive care in Japan and the United States. Crit Care Med 1992; 20: 1207-1215.

  16. Teik O, Hutchinson R, Short S et al. Verification of the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation scoring system in Hong Kong. Intensive Care Med 1993; 21: 698-705.

  17. Zimmerman JE, Douglas P, Wagner DP et al. Improving intensive care unit discharge decisions: Supplementing physician judgment with predictions of next day risk for life support. Crit Care Med 1994; 22: 1373-1384.

  18. Rapoport J, Teres D, Lemeshow S, Gehlbach S. A method for assessing the clinical performance and cost-effectiveness of intensive care units: a multicenter inception cohor study. Crit Care Med 1994; 22: 1385-1391.

  19. Castella X, Artigas A, Bion J et al. A comparison of severity of illness scoring systems for intensive care unit patients: Results of a multicenter multinational study. Crit Care Med 1995; 23: 1327-1335.

  20. Moreno R, Morais P. Outcome prediction in intensive care: results of a prospective, multicentre. Portugueses study. Int Care Med 1997; 23: 177-186.

  21. Nouira S, Belghith M, Elatrous S et al. Predictive value of severity scoring systems: Comparison of four models in Tunisian adult intensive care units. Crit Care Med 1998;26: 852-859.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com