Using patient admission characteristics alone to predict mortality of critically ill patients: A comparison of 3 prognostic scores
Purpose: This study compared the performance of 3 admission prognostic scores in predicting hospital mortality. Materials and methods: Patient admission characteristics and hospital outcome of 9549 patients were recorded prospectively. The discrimination and calibration of the predicted risks of dea...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
2016
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/37759 |
| _version_ | 1848755136265977856 |
|---|---|
| author | Ho, K. Williams, Teresa Harahsheh, Y. Higgins, T. |
| author_facet | Ho, K. Williams, Teresa Harahsheh, Y. Higgins, T. |
| author_sort | Ho, K. |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Purpose: This study compared the performance of 3 admission prognostic scores in predicting hospital mortality. Materials and methods: Patient admission characteristics and hospital outcome of 9549 patients were recorded prospectively. The discrimination and calibration of the predicted risks of death derived from the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS III), Admission Mortality Prediction Model (MPM0 III), and admission Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II were assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and a calibration plot, respectively. Measurements and main results: Of the 9549 patients included in the study, 1276 patients (13.3%) died after intensive care unit admission. Patient admission characteristics were significantly different between the survivors and nonsurvivors. All 3 prognostic scores had a reasonable ability to discriminate between the survivors and nonsurvivors (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for SAPS III, 0.836; MPM0 III, 0.807; admission APACHE, 0.845), with best discrimination in emergency admissions. The SAPS III model had a slightly better calibration and overall performance (slope of calibration curve, 1.03; Brier score, 0.09; Nagelkerke R2, 0.297) compared to the MPM0 III and admission APACHE II model. Conclusions: All 3 intensive care unit admission prognostic scores had a good ability to predict hospital mortality of critically ill patients, with best discrimination in emergency admissions. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T08:51:30Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-37759 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T08:51:30Z |
| publishDate | 2016 |
| publisher | W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-377592018-03-29T09:06:49Z Using patient admission characteristics alone to predict mortality of critically ill patients: A comparison of 3 prognostic scores Ho, K. Williams, Teresa Harahsheh, Y. Higgins, T. Purpose: This study compared the performance of 3 admission prognostic scores in predicting hospital mortality. Materials and methods: Patient admission characteristics and hospital outcome of 9549 patients were recorded prospectively. The discrimination and calibration of the predicted risks of death derived from the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS III), Admission Mortality Prediction Model (MPM0 III), and admission Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II were assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and a calibration plot, respectively. Measurements and main results: Of the 9549 patients included in the study, 1276 patients (13.3%) died after intensive care unit admission. Patient admission characteristics were significantly different between the survivors and nonsurvivors. All 3 prognostic scores had a reasonable ability to discriminate between the survivors and nonsurvivors (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for SAPS III, 0.836; MPM0 III, 0.807; admission APACHE, 0.845), with best discrimination in emergency admissions. The SAPS III model had a slightly better calibration and overall performance (slope of calibration curve, 1.03; Brier score, 0.09; Nagelkerke R2, 0.297) compared to the MPM0 III and admission APACHE II model. Conclusions: All 3 intensive care unit admission prognostic scores had a good ability to predict hospital mortality of critically ill patients, with best discrimination in emergency admissions. 2016 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/37759 10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.10.019 W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC restricted |
| spellingShingle | Ho, K. Williams, Teresa Harahsheh, Y. Higgins, T. Using patient admission characteristics alone to predict mortality of critically ill patients: A comparison of 3 prognostic scores |
| title | Using patient admission characteristics alone to predict mortality of critically ill patients: A comparison of 3 prognostic scores |
| title_full | Using patient admission characteristics alone to predict mortality of critically ill patients: A comparison of 3 prognostic scores |
| title_fullStr | Using patient admission characteristics alone to predict mortality of critically ill patients: A comparison of 3 prognostic scores |
| title_full_unstemmed | Using patient admission characteristics alone to predict mortality of critically ill patients: A comparison of 3 prognostic scores |
| title_short | Using patient admission characteristics alone to predict mortality of critically ill patients: A comparison of 3 prognostic scores |
| title_sort | using patient admission characteristics alone to predict mortality of critically ill patients: a comparison of 3 prognostic scores |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/37759 |