Literature DB >> 11069331

Evaluation of predicted and actual length of stay in 22 Scottish intensive care units using the APACHE III system. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation.

A W Woods1, F N MacKirdy, B M Livingston, J Norrie, J C Howie.   

Abstract

The most recent edition of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation provides a prediction of intensive care unit length of stay in addition to the probability of hospital mortality. Intensive care length of stay is an important determinant of intensive care costs and may be an important indicator of quality of care. Data were collected from 22 Scottish intensive care units over a 2-year period to allow comparison of actual intensive care unit length of stay with that predicted by the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III system. Correlation between actual and predicted stay for individual patients was poor. However, performance of the model for patients, grouped either by predicted length of stay or by intensive care unit, indicated that the model stratified patient groups appropriately while demonstrating a consistent bias. Length of stay in Scottish intensive care units was found to be consistently lower than that predicted by a model which is based on intensive care practice in the USA. Variations in severity of illness in intensive care unit populations cannot readily explain differences in intensive care unit length of stay. The availability of a model capable of predicting length of intensive care stay, based on data reflecting practice in the UK, would compliment current methods of assessing effectiveness of intensive care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11069331     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2000.01552.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anaesthesia        ISSN: 0003-2409            Impact factor:   6.955


  8 in total

1.  Mortality probability model III and simplified acute physiology score II: assessing their value in predicting length of stay and comparison to APACHE IV.

Authors:  Eduard E Vasilevskis; Michael W Kuzniewicz; Brian A Cason; Rondall K Lane; Mitzi L Dean; Ted Clay; Deborah J Rennie; Eric Vittinghoff; R Adams Dudley
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2009-04-10       Impact factor: 9.410

2.  Can the experienced ICU physician predict ICU length of stay and outcome better than less experienced colleagues?

Authors:  Fábio Gusmão Vicente; Frederico Polito Lomar; Christian Mélot; Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2004-01-21       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Critical care medicine in Taiwan from 1997 to 2013 under National Health Insurance.

Authors:  Chih-Cheng Lai; Chung-Han Ho; Chia-Li Chang; Chin-Ming Chen; Shyh-Ren Chiang; Chien-Ming Chao; Jhi-Joung Wang; Kuo-Chen Cheng
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  A review of statistical estimators for risk-adjusted length of stay: analysis of the Australian and new Zealand Intensive Care Adult Patient Data-Base, 2008-2009.

Authors:  John L Moran; Patricia J Solomon
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-05-16       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  Characteristics of chronically critically ill patients: comparing two definitions.

Authors:  Márcio Manozzo Boniatti; Gilberto Friedman; Rodrigo Kappel Castilho; Silvia Regina Rios Vieira; Léa Fialkow
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 2.365

6.  Variations in the length of stay of intensive care unit nonsurvivors in three Scandinavian countries.

Authors:  Kristian Strand; Sten M Walther; Matti Reinikainen; Tero Ala-Kokko; Thomas Nolin; Jan Martner; Petteri Mussalo; Eldar Søreide; Hans K Flaatten
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2010-10-04       Impact factor: 9.097

7.  Comparison of regression methods for modeling intensive care length of stay.

Authors:  Ilona W M Verburg; Nicolette F de Keizer; Evert de Jonge; Niels Peek
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Predict models for prolonged ICU stay using APACHE II, APACHE III and SAPS II scores: A Japanese multicenter retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Daiki Takekawa; Hideki Endo; Eiji Hashiba; Kazuyoshi Hirota
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 3.752

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.