Feasibility of transitioning from APACHE II to SAPS III as prognostic model in a Brazilian general intensive care unit
a retrospective study
Keywords:
APACHE, Mortality, Intensive care units, Prognosis, Intensive careAbstract
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Prognostic models reflect the population characteristics of the countries from which they originate. Predictive models should be customized to fit the general population where they will be used. The aim here was to perform external validation on two predictive models and compare their performance in a mixed population of critically ill patients in Brazil. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective study in a Brazilian general intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: This was a retrospective review of all patients admitted to a 41-bed mixed ICU from August 2011 to September 2012. Calibration (assessed using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test) and discrimination (assessed using area under the curve) of APACHE II and SAPS III were compared. The stan-dardized mortality ratio (SMR) was calculated by dividing the number of observed deaths by the number of expected deaths. RESULTS: A total of 3,333 ICU patients were enrolled. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test showed good calibration for all models in relation to hospital mortality. For in-hospital mortality there was a worse fit for APACHE II in clinical patients. Discrimination was better for SAPS III for in-ICU and in-hospital mortality (P = 0.042). The SMRs for the whole population were 0.27 (confidence interval [CI]: 0.23 – 0.33) for APACHE II and 0.28 (CI: 0.22 – 0.36) for SAPS III. CONCLUSIONS: In this group of critically ill patients, SAPS III was a better prognostic score, with higher discrimination and calibration power.
Downloads
References
Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med. 1985;13(10):818-29.
Metnitz PG, Moreno RP, Almeida E, et al. SAPS 3--From evaluation of the patient to evaluation of the intensive care unit. Part 1: Objectives, methods and cohort description. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31(10):1336-44.
Metnitz PG, Valentin A, Vesely H, et al. Prognostic performance and customization of the SAPS II: results of a multicenter Austrian study. Simplified Acute Physiology Score. Intensive Care Med. 1999;25(2):192-7.
Moreno R, Morais P. Outcome prediction in intensive care: results of a prospective, multicentre, Portuguese study. Intensive Care Med. 1997;23(2):177-86.
Suistomaa M, Niskanen M, Kari A, Hynynen M, Takala J. Customized prediction models based on APACHE II and SAPS II scores in patients with prolonged length of stay in the ICU. Intensive Care Med. 2002;28(4):479-85.
Beck DH, Smith GB, Pappachan JV, Millar B. External validation of the SAPS II, APACHE II and APACHE III prognostic models in South England: a multicentre study. Intensive Care Med. 2003;29(2):249-56.
Wong DT, Crofts SL, Gomez M, McGuire GP, Byrick RJ. Evaluation of predictive ability of APACHE II system and hospital outcome in Canadian intensive care unit patients. Crit Care Med. 1995;23(7):1177-83.
Markgraf R, Deutschinoff G, Pientka L, Scholten T. Comparison of acute physiology and chronic health evaluations II and III and simplified acute physiology score II: a prospective cohort study evaluating these methods to predict outcome in a German interdisciplinary intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2000;28(1):26-33.
Moreno R, Miranda DR, Fidler V, Van Schilfgaarde R. Evaluation of two outcome prediction models on an independent database. Crit Care Med. 1998;26(1):50-61.
Moreno RP, Metnitz PG, Almeida E, et al. SAPS 3--From evaluation of the patient to evaluation of the intensive care unit. Part 2: Development of a prognostic model for hospital mortality at ICU admission. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31(10):1345-55.
Soares M, Salluh JI. Validation of the SAPS 3 admission prognostic model in patients with cancer in need of intensive care. Intensive Care Med. 2006;32(11):1839-44.
Soares M, Silva UV, Teles JM, et al. Validation of four prognostic scores in patients with cancer admitted to Brazilian intensive care units: results from a prospective multicenter study. Intensive Care Med. 2010;36(7):1188-95.
Nassar AP Jr, Mocelin AO, Nunes AL, et al. Caution when using prognostic models: a prospective comparison of 3 recent prognostic models. J Crit Care. 2012;27(4):423.e1-7.
Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. Wiley; 1989.
Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143(1):29-36.
Gardner MJ, Altman DG. Confidence intervals rather than P values: estimation rather than hypothesis testing. BMJ. 1986; 292(6522):746-50.
Silva Júnior JM, Malbouisson LM, Nuevo HL, et al. Applicability of the simplified acute physiology score (SAPS 3) in Brazilian hospitals. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2010;60(1):20-31.
Alves CJ, Franco GPP, Nakata CT, et al. Avaliação de índices prognósticos para pacientes idosos admitidos em unidades de terapia intensiva [Evaluation of prognostic indicators for elderly patients admitted in intensive care units]. Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2009;21(1):1-8.
Costa e Silva VT, de Castro I, Liaño F, et al. Performance of the third-generation models of severity scoring systems (APACHE IV, SAPS 3 and MPM-III) in acute kidney injury critically ill patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2011;26(12):3894-901.
Khwannimit B, Bhurayanontachai R. The performance of customised APACHE II and SAPS II in predicting mortality of mixed critically ill patients in a Thai medical intensive care unit. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2009;37(5):784-90.
Beck DH, Smith GB, Taylor BL. The impact of low-risk intensive care unit admissions on mortality probabilities by SAPS II, APACHE II and APACHE III. Anaesthesia. 2002;57(1):21-6.
McNelis J, Marini C, Kalimi R, et al. A comparison of predictive outcomes of APACHE II and SAPS II in a surgical intensive care unit. Am J Med Qual. 2001;16(5):161-5.
Kern H, Redlich U, Hotz H, et al. Risk factors for prolonged ventilation after cardiac surgery using APACHE II, SAPS II, and TISS: comparison of three different models. Intensive Care Med. 2001;27(2):407-15.
Chung SW, Kirkpatrick AW, Kim HL, Scudamore CH, Yoshida EM. Correlation between physiological assessment and outcome after liver transplantation. Am J Surg. 2000;179(5):396-9.
Umbro I, Tinti F, Mordenti M, et al. Model for end-stage liver disease score versus simplified acute physiology score criteria in acute renal failure after liver transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2011;43(4):1139-41.
Bein T, Fröhlich D, Pömsl J, Forst H, Pratschke E. The predictive value of four scoring systems in liver transplant recipients. Intensive Care Med. 1995;21(1):32-7.
