Critical Care: Critical Care |

Comparison of the Mortality Prediction of Different ICU Scoring Systems (APACHE II and III, SAPS II, and SOFA) in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Patients FREE TO VIEW

Abdelbaset Saleh, MD; Magda Ahmed, MD; Ahmed Abdel-lateif
Author and Funding Information

Mansoura University Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura, Egypt

Copyright 2016, American College of Chest Physicians. All Rights Reserved.

Chest. 2016;149(4_S):A147. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2016.02.153
Text Size: A A A
Published online

SESSION TITLE: Critical Care

SESSION TYPE: Original Investigation Slide

PRESENTED ON: Sunday, April 17, 2016 at 02:15 PM - 03:45 PM

PURPOSE: Scoring systems can be used to define critically ill patients, estimate their prognosis, help in clinical decision making, guide the allocation of resources and estimate the quality of care in the ICU. Aim of this study was to compare the predictive accuracy among four predictive scoring systems in the ICU in ARDS patients.

METHODS: A prospective cohort study including consecutively admitted 110 adult ICU patients (88 males) with ARDS from Saudi German Hospital, Madinah, was performed from June 2013 to January 2015. The median age of the patients was 38 years, the median duration of illness before ICU admission was 6 days, and the median duration of ICU admission was 27 days. The APACHE II, APACHE III, SAPS II, and SOFA scores were calculated based on the worst values during the first 24 h of admission.

RESULTS: The actual mortality rate (27.3%) was higher than the estimated mortality rates, with the highest predicted rate of 11.3% obtained using the APACHE II. All four severity scores were significantly associated with mortality (F= 62.772, p = 0.000) and explained 83% of its variability (R2 = 0.834). However, after adjustment, only the APACHE III scoring system was a significant predictor (Beta = −0.753, p=0.000). Three scoring systems were significantly associated with mortality (F = 42.055, p = 0.000) and explained almost 70% of its variability (R2=0.712), but after adjustment, only the APACHE II was a significant predictor (Beta = −0.631, p=0.041). The combination of the severity score and mortality prediction were significant predictors of mortality (Beta = −1.397, p = 0.000 and Beta = 0.517, p = 0.036, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of the studied scoring systems for predicting ICU mortality in ARDS patients is limited. The performance of the APACHE II/III scorning systems was superior to that of other systems in terms of predicting the severity and mortality, and the combination of scores improved the performance. There is a need to develop ARDS-specific scoring systems. Until a new system is developed, it is better to use the updated versions of the APACHE scorning system or a combination of all ICU scoring systems.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is one of the leading causes of mortality in critically ill patients therefor, in the era of H1N1 and MERS-CoV, it is essentcial to to fined simple physiologic scoring system to evaluate the prognosis of ARDS patients from the first day of admission.

DISCLOSURE: The following authors have nothing to disclose: Abdelbaset Saleh, Magda Ahmed, Ahmed Abdel-lateif

No Product/Research Disclosure Information




Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Find Similar Articles
CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543