Scoring systems in intensive care

1998 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Steele ◽  
G.A. Bocconi ◽  
R. Oggioni ◽  
G. Tulli
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Scoring Systems

scholarly journals Sepsis Diagnostics: Intensive Care Scoring Systems Superior to MicroRNA Biomarker Testing

Diagnostics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 701
Author(s):  
Fabian Link ◽  
Knut Krohn ◽  
Anna-Maria Burgdorff ◽  
Annett Christel ◽  
Julia Schumann
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Digital Pcr ◽  
Absolute Quantification ◽  
Medical Problem ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Multiple Parameters ◽  
Sepsis Diagnosis ◽  
Intensive Care Patients ◽  
Healthy Control

Sepsis represents a serious medical problem accounting for numerous deaths of critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICUs). An early, sensitive, and specific diagnosis is considered a key element for improving the outcome of sepsis patients. In addition to classical laboratory markers, ICU scoring systems and serum miRNAs are discussed as potential sepsis biomarkers. In the present prospective observational study, the suitability of miRNAs in sepsis diagnosis was tested based on proper validated and normalized data (i.e., absolute quantification by means of Droplet Digital PCR (ddPCR)) in direct comparison to classical sepsis markers and ICU scores within the same patient cohort. Therefore, blood samples of septic intensive care patients (n = 12) taken at day of admission at ICU were compared to non-septic intensive care patients (n = 12) and a healthy control group (n = 12). Our analysis indicates that all tested biomarkers have only a moderate informative power and do not allow an unequivocal differentiation between septic and non-septic ICU patients. In conclusion, there is no standalone laboratory parameter that enables a reliable diagnosis of sepsis. miRNAs are not superior to classical parameters in this respect. It seems recommendable to measure multiple parameters and scores and to interpret them with regard to the clinical presentation.

scholarly journals The use of score for neonatal acute physiology perinatal extention II (SNAPPE II) in predicting neonatal outcome in neonatal intensive care unit

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 241
Author(s):  
Mia R A ◽  
Risa Etika ◽  
Agus Harianto ◽  
Fatimah Indarso ◽  
Sylviati M Damanik
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care ◽  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
Newborn Care ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Laboratory Observation ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Overall Mortality

Background Scoring systems which quantify initial risks have animportant role in aiding execution of optimum health services by pre-dicting morbidity and mortality. One of these is the score for neonatalacute physiology perinatal extention (SNAPPE), developed byRichardson in 1993 and simplified in 2001. It is derived of 6 variablesfrom the physical and laboratory observation within the first 12 hoursof admission, and 3 variables of perinatal risks of mortality.Objectives To assess the validity of SNAPPE II in predicting mor-tality at neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), Soetomo Hospital,Surabaya. The study was also undertaken to evolve the best cut-offscore for predicting mortality.Methods Eighty newborns were admitted during a four-month periodand were evaluated with the investigations as required for the specifi-cations of SNAPPE II. Neonates admitted >48 hours of age or afterhaving been discharged, who were moved to lower newborn care <24hours and those who were discharged on request were excluded. Re-ceiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) were constructed to derivethe best cut-off score with Kappa and McNemar Test.Results Twenty eight (35%) neonates died during the study, 22(82%) of them died within the first six days. The mean SNAPPE IIscore was 26.3+19.84 (range 0-81). SNAPPE II score of thenonsurvivors was significantly higher than the survivors(42.75+18.59 vs 17.4+14.05; P=0.0001). SNAPPE II had a goodperformance in predicting overall mortality and the first-6-daysmortality, with area under the ROC 0.863 and 0.889. The best cut-off score for predicting mortality was 30 with sensitivity 81.8%,specificity 76.9%, positive predictive value 60.0% and negativepredictive value 90.0%.Conclusions SNAPPE II is a measurement of illness severity whichcorrelates well with neonatal mortality at NICU, Soetomo Hospital.The score of more than 30 is associated with higher mortality

scholarly journals Application of different scoring systems and their value in pediatric intensive care unit

2014 ◽  
Vol 62 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 59-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanaa I. Rady ◽  
Shereen A. Mohamed ◽  
Nabil A. Mohssen ◽  
Mohamed ElBaz
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Pediatric Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Pediatric Intensive Care ◽  
Scoring Systems

scholarly journals ABC of intensive care: Outcome data and scoring systems

BMJ ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 319 (7204) ◽  
pp. 241-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Gunning ◽  
K. Rowan
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Care Outcome

scholarly journals The Pros and Cons of the Prediction Game: The Never-ending Debate of Mortality in the Intensive Care Unit

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (18) ◽  
pp. 3394 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piotr A. Fuchs ◽  
Iwona J. Czech ◽  
Łukasz J. Krzych
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Roc Curves ◽  
Simplified Acute Physiology Score ◽  
Apache Ii ◽  
Icu Mortality ◽  
Saps Ii ◽  
Icu Discharge ◽  
Pros And Cons ◽  
Long Term Prognosis

Background: The Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scales are scoring systems used in intensive care units (ICUs) worldwide. We aimed to investigate their usefulness in predicting short- and long-term prognosis in the local ICU. Methods: This single-center observational study covered 905 patients admitted from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2017 to a tertiary mixed ICU. SAPS II, APACHE II, and SOFA scores were calculated based on the worst values from the first 24 h post-admission. Patients were divided into surgical (SP) and nonsurgical (NSP) subjects. Unadjusted ICU and post-ICU discharge mortality rates were considered the outcomes. Results: Baseline SAPS II, APACHE II, and SOFA scores were 41.1 ± 20.34, 14.07 ± 8.73, and 6.33 ± 4.12 points, respectively. All scores were significantly lower among SP compared to NSP (p < 0.05). ICU mortality reached 35.4% and was significantly lower for SP (25.3%) than NSP (57.9%) (p < 0.001). The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were 0.826, 0.836, and 0.788 for SAPS II, APACHE II, and SOFA scales, respectively, for predicting ICU prognosis, and 0.708, 0.709, and 0.661 for SAPS II, APACHE II, and SOFA, respectively, for post-ICU prognosis. Conclusions: Although APACHE II and SAPS II are good predictors of ICU mortality, they failed to predict survival after discharge. Surgical patients had a better prognosis than medical ICU patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document