• Journal of Korean Critical Care Nursing
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.71-79
• /
• 2015

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the applicability of the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and Acute Physiology, Age, Chronic Health Evaluation III (APACHE III) to the prediction of the healthcare outcomes of intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods: This research was performed with 136 adult patients (age>18 years) who were admitted to the ICU between May and June 2012. Data were measured using the CCI score with a comorbidity index of 19 and the APACHE III score on the standard of the worst result with vital signs and laboratory results. Discrimination was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under an ROC curve (AUC). Calibration was performed using logistic regression. Results: The overall mortality was 25.7%. The mean CCI and APACHE III scores for survivors were found to be significantly lower than those of non-survivors. The AUC was 0.835 for the APACHE III score and remained high, at 0.688, for the CCI score. The rate of concordance according to the CCI and the APACHE III score was 69.1%. Conclusion: The route of admission, days in ICU, CCI, and APACHE III score are associated with an increased mortality risk in ICU patients.

• Korean Journal of Adult Nursing
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.93-101
• /
• 2002

Using the APCHE III tool, this study was about the factors related to the death of ICU-patients. From 1999. 12. 1 to 2000. 9. 30, the 284 patients admitted to ICU at P university who were over 15 years of age were selected for the subjets. The data was analyzed through SPSS WIN program for frequency, percentile, $x^2$-test, t-test and logistic regression. The results are summarized as follows: 1) Of the 284 patients, 88died. The mortality is 31.0 percent. The average APACHE III point was $48.62{\pm}32.32$. The average point of non-survivors was higher than that of survivors. 2) There are the significant difference between APACHE III marks and mortality. The mortality rate were over 50 percent 60 points of the mark. When the marks were over 100 points, the mortality were over 90 percent. Below 40 points, the mortality was below 10 percent. Among the variables in the APACHE III, the most significant variables in explaining death were neurologic abnormalities, pulse, $PaO_2$/$AaDO_2$, creatinine, sodium, glucose, chronic health state and age. According to the variables, the models explained the 42.43 percent of the variance in patient's death. In conclusion, the APACHE III tool can be used to predict the progress of ICU patients, and can also be used for the selection of patients for ICU admission/discharge criteria.

• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• v.38 no.3
• /
• pp.276-282
• /
• 2005

Objectives : To evaluate the predictive validity of three scoring systems; the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation(APACHE) III, simplified acute physiology score(SAPS) II, and mortality probability model(MPM) II systems in critically ill patients. Methods : A concurrent and retrospective study conducted by collecting data on consecutive patients admitted to the intensive care unit(ICU) including surgical, medical and coronary care unit between January 1, 2004, and March 31, 2004. Data were collected on 348 patients consecutively admitted to the ICU(aged 16 years or older, no transfer, ICU stay at least 8 hours). Three models were analyzed using logistic regression. Discrimination was assessed using receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curves, sensitivity, specificity, and correct classification rate. Calibration was assessed using the Lemeshow-Hosmer goodness of fit H-statistic. Results : For the APACHE III, SAPS II and MPM II systems, the area under the receiver operating characterist ic(ROC) curves were 0.981, 0.978, and 0.941 respectively. With a predicted risk of 0.5, the sensitivities for the APACHE III, SAPS II, and MPM II systems were 81.1, 79.2 and 71.7%, the specificities 98.3, 98.6, and 98.3%, and the correct classification rates 95.7, 95.7, and 94.3%, respectively. The SAPS II and APACHE III systems showed good calibrations(chi-squared H=2.5838 p=0.9577 for SAPS II, and chi-squared H=4.3761 p=0.8217 for APACHE III). Conclusions : The APACHE III and SAPS II systems have excellent powers of mortality prediction, and calibration, and can be useful tools for the quality assessment of intensive care units(ICUs).

• Korean Journal of Adult Nursing
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.464-473
• /
• 2005

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the predictive ability of three mortality scoring systems; Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation(APACHE) III, Simplified Acute Physiology Score(SAPS) II, and Mortality Probability Model(MPM) II in discriminating in-hospital mortality for intensive care unit(ICU) patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage. Methods: Eighty-nine patients admitted to the ICU at a university hospital in Daejeon Korea were recruited for this study. Medical records of the subject were reviewed by a researcher from January 1, 2003 to March 31, 2004, retrospectively. Data were analyzed using SAS 8.1. General characteristic of the subjects were analyzed for frequency and percentage. Results: The results of this study were summarized as follows. The values of the Hosmer-Lemeshow's goodness-of-fit test for the APACHE III, the SAPS II and the MPM II were chi-square H=4.3849 p=0.7345, chi-square H=15.4491 p=0.0307, and chi-square H=0.3356 p=0.8455, respectively. Thus, The calibration of the MPM II found to be the best scoring system, followed by APACHE III. For ROC curve analysis, the areas under the curves of APACHE III, SAPS II, and MPM II were 0.934, 0.918 and 0.813, respectively. Thus, the discrimination of three scoring systems were satisfactory. For two-by-two decision matrices with a decision criterion of 0.5, the correct classification of three scoring systems were good. Conclusion: Both the APACHE III and the MPM II had an excellent power of mortality prediction and discrimination for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage patients in ICU.

• Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing
• /
• v.30 no.5
• /
• pp.1243-1253
• /
• 2000

The purpose of this study was to verify the validity of the Patient Severity Classification Tool by examining the correlations between the APACHE Ⅲ and the Patient Severity Classification Tool and to propose admission criteria to the ICU. The instruments used for this study were the APACHE Ⅲ developed by Knaus and the Patient Severity Classification Tool developed by Korean Clinical Nurses Association. Data was collected from the 156 Medical ICU patients during their first 24 hours of admission at the Seoul National University Hospital by three trained Medical ICU nurses from April 20 to August 31 1999. Data were analyzed using the frequency, $x^2$, Wilcoxon rank sum test, and Spearman rho. There was statistically significant correlations between the scores of the APACHE III and the Patient Severity Classification Tool. Mortality rate was increased as patients classification of severity in both the APACHE III and the Patient Severity Classification Tool scored higher. The Patient Severity Classification Tool was proved to be a valid and reliable tool, and a useful tool as one of the severity predicting factors, ICU admission criteria, information sharing between ICUs, quality evaluations of ICUs, and ICU nurse staffing.

• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.48 no.2
• /
• pp.236-245
• /
• 2000

Background: Transbronchial lung biopsy(TBLB) has known to yield useful information for pulmonary infiltrates of uncertain etiology, However, its safety and usefulness have not been conclusive in the critically ill patients with respiratory failure. Moreover, TBLB has not been recommended for patients with mechanical ventilation. This study was conducted to investigate the diagnostic values and risks of Will performed on critically ill patients at bedside to obtain information on the pulmonary infiltrate of unknown etiology. Methods: Twenty patients(21 admissions with 23 cases) with diffuse pulmonary infiltrates who were treated in a medical intensive care unit of a tertiary referral hospital from January 1994 to May 1998, were enrolled for the study. Their medical records were retrospectively reviewed. TBLB was opted when a noninvasive diagnostic work-up failed to reveal the cause for the pulmonary infiltrate. The procedure was performed at patients' bedside without assistance of fluoroscopy. Bronchial washing or bronchoalveolar lavage was performed on the same pulmonary segment before performing TBLB. Results: Adequate specimens were obtained in 18 cases(78%). TBLB provided a specific diagnosis in two cases. The results of TBLB suggested the underlying etiology in 9 cases; bacterial pneumonitis(4), hypersensitivity pneumonitis(1), polymyositis(1), radiation fibrosis(1), idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis(1), and BOOP(1). Therapeutic decisions were altered in 11 cases(47.8%) based on the TBLB results. Pneumocystis carinii was found in the BAL fluid of another case. Ten patients with a therapeutic change and ten patients without a management change had mortality rates of 40% and 80%, respectively. The APACHE III scores were significantly higher in patients with complications($72.8{\pm}21.8$) compared with those without complications ($48.3{\pm}18.9$)(p<0.05). The complication rates were higher in those with mechanical ventilation(50%) than in those without Mechanical ventilation(33%), but the difference was not statistically significant(p=0.3). Conclusions: TBLB may be a useful diagnostic option for critically ill patients with unknown cause of pulmonary infiltrates. However, it should be cautious be used with care for patients with mechanical ventilation or for severely ill patients.