Key result
The APACHE II scoring system provided excellent discrimination (AUC 0.828) and better calibration for predicting short-term hospital mortality in surgical ICU patients compared to APACHE III and SAPS II.
Why the study?
Does the APACHE II scoring system better predict mortality and length of stay compared to APACHE III and SAPS II in surgical ICU patients?
Observational (n=202)
No
Does the APACHE II scoring system better predict mortality and length of stay compared to APACHE III and SAPS II in surgical ICU patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.828% vs 0.782%
The APACHE II scoring system demonstrated superior discrimination and calibration for predicting short-term mortality in surgical ICU patients compared to APACHE III and SAPS II.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
May support APACHE II for mortality prediction in surgical ICUs; leaves open prospective validation and LOS assessment.
Gilani et al. (2014) conducted an observational in Surgical intensive care unit patients (n=202). APACHE II scoring system vs. APACHE III and SAPS II scoring systems was evaluated on Discrimination (Area Under Curve) for predicting short-term hospital mortality (95% CI 0.72 to 0.93). The APACHE II scoring system provided excellent discrimination (AUC 0.828) and better calibration for predicting short-term hospital mortality in surgical ICU patients compared to APACHE III and SAPS II.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: