Evaluation of APACHE II system among intensive care patients at a teaching hospital
Keywords:
APACHE II, Illness, Severity, Index, Outcome, Prediction, Prognosis, Intensive, Care, UnitAbstract
CONTEXT: The high-complexity features of intensive care unit services and the clinical situation of patients themselves render correct prognosis fundamentally important not only for patients, their families and physicians, but also for hospital administrators, fund-providers and controllers. Prognostic indices have been developed for estimating hospital mortality rates for hospitalized patients, based on demographic, physiological and clinical data. OBJECTIVE: The APACHE II system was applied within an intensive care unit to evaluate its ability to predict patient outcome; to compare illness severity with outcomes for clinical and surgical patients; and to compare the recorded result with the predicted death rate. DESIGN: Diagnostic test. SETTING: Clinical and surgical intensive care unit in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: The study involved 521 consecutive patients admitted to the intensive care unit from July 1998 to June 1999. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: APACHE II score, in-hospital mortality, receiver operating characteristic curve, decision matrices and linear regression analysis. RESULTS: The patients’ mean age was 50 ± 19 years and the APACHE II score was 16.7 ± 7.3. There were 166 clinical patients (32%), 173 (33%) postelective surgery patients (33%), and 182 post-emergency surgery patients (35%), thus producing statistically similar proportions. The APACHE II scores for clinical patients (18.5 ± 7.8) were similar to those for non-elective surgery patients (18.6 ± 6.5) and both were greater than for elective surgery patients (13.0 ± 6.3) (p < 0.05). The higher this score was, the higher the mortality rate was (p < 0.05). The predicted death rate was 25.6% and the recorded death rate was 35.5%. Through the use of receiver operating curve analysis, good discrimination was found (area under the curve = 0.80). From the 2 x 2 decision matrix, 72.2% of patients were correctly classified (sensitivity = 35.1%; specificity = 92.6%). Linear regression analysis was equivalent to r2 = 0.92. CONCLUSIONS: APACHE II was useful for stratifying these patients. The illness severity and death rate among clinical patients were higher than those recorded for surgical patients. Despite the stratification ability of the APACHE II system, it lacked accuracy in predicting death rates. The recorded death rate was higher than the predicted rate.
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.
Knaus WA, Wagner DP, Draper EA, et al. The APACHE III prognostic system. Risk prediction of hospital mortality for criti- cally ill hospitalized adults. Chest 1991;100(6):1619-36.
Le Gall JR, Lemeshow S, Saulnier F. A new Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) based on a European/North Ameri- can multicenter study. JAMA 1993;270(24):2957-63.
Lemeshow S, Klar J, Teres D, et al. Mortality probability models for patients in the intensive care unit for 48 or 72 hours: a pro- spective, multicenter study. Crit Care Med 1994;22(9):1351-8.
Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. [Ministry of Health] Portaria no 2.918, de 09 de junho de 1998. Estabelece critérios de classificação entre as unidades de tratamento intensivo. [Estab- lishes the classification criteria for different intensive care units]. Diário Oficial da União 1998;11(15 de junho de 1998):39.
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 inter- disciplinary intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 2000;28(1):26-33.
Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. An evalu- ation of outcome from intensive care in major medical centers. Ann Intern Med 1986;104(3):410-8.
Sirio CA, Tajimi K, Tase C, et al. An initial comparison of in- tensive care in Japan and the United States. Crit. Care Med 1992;20(9):1207-15.
Chen FG, Koh KF, Goh MH. Validation of APACHE II score in a surgical intensive care unit. Singapore Med J 1993;34(4):322-4.
Beck DH, Taylor BL, Millar B, Smith GB. Prediction of out- come from intensive care: a prospective cohort study compar- ing Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and III prognostic systems in a United Kingdom intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 1997;25(1):9-15.
Costa JI, Gomes do Amaral JL, Munechika M, Juliano Y, Bezerra Filho JG. Severity and prognosis in intensive care: prospective application of the APACHE II index. São Paulo Med J 1999;117(5):205-14.
Bastos PG, Sun X, Wagner DP, Wu Aw, Knaus WA. Glasgow Coma Scale score in the evaluation of outcome in the intensive care unit: findings from the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III Study. Crit Care Med 1993;21(10):1459-65.
Wong DT, Crofts SL, Gomez M, McGuire GP, Byrick RJ. Evalu- ation of predictive ability of APACHE II system and hospital outcome in Canadian intensive care unit patients. Crit Care Med 1995;23(7):1177-83.
Oh TE, Hutchinson R, Short S, Buckley T, Lin E, Leung D. Verification of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation scoring system in a Hong Kong intensive care unit. Care Med 1993;21(5):698-705.
Milani Júnior R, Rocha AS. Acurácia prognóstica e eficácia de tratamento em UTI avaliadas pelo sistema APACHE II. Rev Hosp Clin Fac Med São Paulo 1989;44(4):149-52.
Gonçalves WM, Kruel NF, Araújo PA, Teixeira DO. Análise do sistema prognóstico de mortalidade apache II em pacientes cirúrgicos de unidade de terapia intensiva. Rev Col Bras Cir 1999;26(2):115-8.
Rowan KM, Kerr JH, Major E, McPherson K, Short A, Vessey MP. Intensive Care Society’s APACHE II study in Britain and Ireland II: Outcome comparisons of intensive care units after adjustment for case mix by the American APACHE II method. BMJ 1993;307(6910):977-81.
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(4):318-26.
Giangiuliani G, Mancini A, Gui D. Validation of a severity of illness score (APACHE II) in a surgical intensive care unit. In- tensive Care Med 1989;15(8):519-22.
Livianu J, Orlando JM, Maciel FM, Proença JO. Comparison of 3 severity of illness scoring systems for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Crit Care Med 1998;26(1 Suppl):A125.
Dowling RD, Landreneau RJ, Wachs ME, Ferson PF. Predict- ing outcome after ICU admission. The art and science of as- sessing risk. Chest 1992;102(6):1861-70.
