Why the study?
Multiple scoring systems exist to determine ICU mortality, but the comparative performance of SAPS III versus SOFA in non-traumatic ICU admissions needed evaluation.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Population
100 non-traumatic patients admitted to the ICU
Comparison
SAPS III scoring vs SOFA scoring
Design
Retrospective cross-sectional study
SAPS III may outperform SOFA for mortality prediction in non-traumatic ICU patients; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before adoption.
Background: There are different scoring systems to determine the mortality rate of patients to intensive care unit (ICU), the aim of this study was to compare the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) III and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) tests in determining the degree of mortality in non-traumatic patients who admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: In this retrospective cross-sectional study, mortality rate was assessed with using of SOFA and SAPS III scorings on 100 non traumatic patients who admitted to the ICU according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The patients were also divided into two groups based on mortality and were included survive and non-survive groups. Results: The mean SOFA score in survived and non-survived groups were 2.03 + 1.96 and 5.42 + 3.84 respectively, and for SAPS III, were 30.76 + 8.17 and 55.38 + 15.47 respectively. The SOFA and SAPS III scores in the non-survived group was significantly higher than survived group (P <0.0001 for both tests). The sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 79/75%, 85/71%, 95/5%, 52/9% for the SAPSII score, respectively and 91/14%, 57/14%, 88/9%, 63/2% for the SOFA Scoring system, respectively . Conclusion: SAPS III was a better prognostic score in determining of mortality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shetabi et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: