Literature DB >> 3137374

Comparison of clinical assessment with APACHE II for predicting mortality risk in patients admitted to a medical intensive care unit.

J A Kruse1, M C Thill-Baharozian, R W Carlson.   

Abstract

The APACHE II (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) system has been widely used as an objective means of predicting outcome in critically ill patients. We prospectively evaluated patients consecutively admitted to the medical intensive care unit to compare the predictive accuracy of APACHE II with clinical assessment by critical care personnel. At the time of admission to the intensive care unit, the house staff and nurse responsible for each patient were asked to estimate the patient's hospital mortality risk. The patient's APACHE II score was calculated and a prediction of the patient's hospital mortality risk was then computed on the basis of this score. A total of 366 patients were studied. Mortality predictions were obtained from 57 physicians and 33 critical care nurses. We were unable to demonstrate a significant difference in the accuracy of APACHE II predictions compared with either physicians' or nurses' predictions. Clinical assessment and APACHE II were both highly predictive of outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3137374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  38 in total

Review 1.  Predicting outcome in critical care: the current status of the APACHE prognostic scoring system.

Authors:  D T Wong; W A Knaus
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 5.063

2.  Predicting outcome in intensive therapy units--a comparison of Apache II with subjective assessments.

Authors:  R J Marks; R S Simons; R A Blizzard; D R Browne
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Decision support in multi-professional communication.

Authors:  Scott Weber; Karen L Courtney; Mary Benham-Hutchins
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 4.460

Review 4.  Scoring and outcome audit systems relevant to emergency medicine.

Authors:  M Waters; P Nightingale
Journal:  Arch Emerg Med       Date:  1990-03

5.  Standard assessments of frailty are validated predictors of mortality in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis.

Authors:  Elliot B Tapper; Daniel Finkelstein; Murray A Mittleman; Gail Piatkowski; Michelle Lai
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 17.425

6.  NHS review. Improving clinical effectiveness in the NHS: an alternative to the white paper.

Authors:  L Quam
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-08-12

7.  Triaging patients to the ICU: a pilot study of factors influencing admission decisions and patient outcomes.

Authors:  Maité Garrouste-Orgeas; Luc Montuclard; Jean-François Timsit; Benoit Misset; Marie Christias; Jean Carlet
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2003-04-02       Impact factor: 17.440

8.  Frailty predicts waitlist mortality in liver transplant candidates.

Authors:  J C Lai; S Feng; N A Terrault; B Lizaola; H Hayssen; K Covinsky
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2014-06-16       Impact factor: 8.086

9.  Importance of pre-existing co-morbidities for prognosis of septicemia in critically ill patients.

Authors:  D Pittet; B Thiévent; R P Wenzel; N Li; G Gurman; P M Suter
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  Impact of procedure-related complications on patient outcome on a general medicine service.

Authors:  M D Nettleman; M J Bock; A P Nelson; J Fieselmann
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.