Literature DB >> 8968263

Effect of changing patient mix on the performance of an intensive care unit severity-of-illness model: how to distinguish a general from a specialty intensive care unit.

R Murphy-Filkins1, D Teres, S Lemeshow, D W Hosmer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effects of patient mix diversity on performance of an intensive care unit (ICU) severity-of-illness model.
DESIGN: Multiple patient populations were created using computer simulations. A customized version of the Mortality Probability Model (MPM) II admission model was used to ascertain probabilities of hospital mortality. Performance of the model was assessed using discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) and calibration (goodness-of-fit testing).
SETTING: Intensive care units. PATIENTS: Data were collected from 4,224 ICU patients from two Massachusetts hospitals (Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, MA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA) and two New York hospitals (Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY; Ellis Hospital, Schenectady, NY).
INTERVENTIONS: Random samples were taken from a database. The percentage of patients with each model disease characteristic was varied by assigning weights (ranging from 0 to 10) to patients with a disease characteristic. Three simulations were run for each of 15 model variables at each of 16 weights, totaling 720 simulations.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and model fit were assessed in each random sample. Removing patients with a given disease characteristic did not affect discrimination or calibration. Increasing frequency of patients with each disease characteristic above the original frequency caused discrimination and calibration to deteriorate. Model fit was more robust to increases in less frequently occurring patient conditions. From the goodness-of-fit test, a critical percentage for each admission model variable was determined for each disease characteristic, defined as the percentage at which the average p value for the test over the three replications decreased to < .10.
CONCLUSIONS: The concept of critical percentages is potentially clinically important. It might provide an easy first step in checking applicability of a given severity-of-illness model and in defining a general medical-surgical ICU. If the critical percentages are exceeded, as might occur in a highly specialized ICU, the model would not be accurate. Alternative modeling approaches might be to customize the model coefficients to the population for more accurate probabilities or to develop specialized models. The MPM approach remained robust for a large variation in patient mix factors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8968263     DOI: 10.1097/00003246-199612000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  30 in total

1.  Comparison of APACHE III, APACHE IV, SAPS 3, and MPM0III and influence of resuscitation status on model performance.

Authors:  Mark T Keegan; Ognjen Gajic; Bekele Afessa
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 9.410

2.  Validation of pediatric index of mortality 2 (PIM2) in a single pediatric intensive care unit in Japan.

Authors:  Toshihiro Imamura; Satoshi Nakagawa; Ran D Goldman; Takeo Fujiwara
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Comparison between SAPS II and SAPS 3 in predicting hospital mortality in a cohort of 103 Italian ICUs. Is new always better?

Authors:  Daniele Poole; Carlotta Rossi; Nicola Latronico; Giancarlo Rossi; Stefano Finazzi; Guido Bertolini
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  A nonparametric updating method to correct clinical prediction model drift.

Authors:  Sharon E Davis; Robert A Greevy; Christopher Fonnesbeck; Thomas A Lasko; Colin G Walsh; Michael E Matheny
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  Comparison of Severity Scoring Systems in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit in India: A Single-Center Prospective, Observational Cohort Study.

Authors:  Vinayak K Patki; Sandeep Raina; Jennifer V Antin
Journal:  J Pediatr Intensive Care       Date:  2016-06-29

6.  Use of the sequential organ failure assessment score as a severity score.

Authors:  André Carlos Kajdacsy-Balla Amaral; Fábio Moreira Andrade; Rui Moreno; Antonio Artigas; Francis Cantraine; Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2005-01-25       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  Validation of the APACHE IV model and its comparison with the APACHE II, SAPS 3, and Korean SAPS 3 models for the prediction of hospital mortality in a Korean surgical intensive care unit.

Authors:  Hannah Lee; Yoon-Jung Shon; Hyerim Kim; Hyesun Paik; Hee-Pyoung Park
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2014-08-26

8.  External validation of the SAPS II, APACHE II and APACHE III prognostic models in South England: a multicentre study.

Authors:  Dieter H Beck; Gary B Smith; John V Pappachan; Brian Millar
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2003-01-18       Impact factor: 17.440

9.  How to treat esophageal perforations when determinants and predictors of mortality are considered.

Authors:  Andrej Udelnow; Markus Huber-Lang; Markus Juchems; Karl Träger; Doris Henne-Bruns; Peter Würl
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  A bootstrap approach for assessing the uncertainty of outcome probabilities when using a scoring system.

Authors:  Gabriele Cevenini; Paolo Barbini
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2010-08-26       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.