scholarly journals Predicting mortality in the intensive care unit: a comparison of the University Health Consortium expected probability of mortality and the Mortality Prediction Model III

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela K. M. Lipshutz ◽  
John R. Feiner ◽  
Barbara Grimes ◽  
Michael A. Gropper
2001 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 313-319 ◽  
Author(s):  
L Copeland-Fields ◽  
T Griffin ◽  
T Jenkins ◽  
M Buckley ◽  
LC Wise

BACKGROUND: Critical care nurses must collaborate with physicians, patients, and patients' families when making decisions about aggressiveness of care. However, few studies address nurses' ability to predict outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To compare predictions of survival outcomes made by nurses, by physicians, and by using the Mortality Prediction Model. METHODS: Predictions of survival and function and attitudes toward aggressiveness of care based on the predictions were recorded on questionnaires in the emergency department by emergency and intensive care unit physicians and by intensive care unit nurses at the time of admission to the unit between February and September 1995 for 235 consecutive adult nontrauma patients. Scores on the Mortality Prediction Model were calculated on admission. Data on 85 of the 235 patients were analyzed by using descriptive, chi 2, and correlational statistics. Nurses' predictions of function were compared with patients' actual outcomes 6 months after admission. RESULTS: Nurses' predictions of survival were comparable to those of emergency physicians and superior to those obtained by using the objective tool. Years of nursing experience had no relationship to attitudes toward aggressiveness of care. Nurses accurately predicted functional outcomes in 52% of the followed-up cases. Intensive care physicians were more accurate than nurses and emergency physicians in predicting survival. All predictions made by clinicians were superior to those obtained by using the model. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses can predict survival outcomes as accurately as physicians do. Greater sensitivity and specificity are necessary before clinical judgment or predictive tools can be considered as screens for determining aggressiveness of care.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaeyoung Yang ◽  
Hong-Gook Lim ◽  
Wonhyeong Park ◽  
Dongseok Kim ◽  
Jin Sun Yoon ◽  
...  

Abstract BackgroundPrediction of mortality in intensive care units is very important. Thus, various mortality prediction models have been developed for this purpose. However, they do not accurately reflect the changing condition of the patient in real time. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a machine learning model that predicts short-term mortality in the intensive care unit using four easy-to-collect vital signs.MethodsTwo independent retrospective observational cohorts were included in this study. The primary training cohort included the data of 1968 patients admitted to the intensive care unit at the Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea, from January 2018 to March 2019. The external validation cohort comprised the records of 409 patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit at Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea, from January 2019 to December 2019. Datasets of four vital signs (heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and peripheral capillary oxygen saturation [SpO2]) measured every hour for 10 h were used for the development of the machine learning model. The performances of mortality prediction models generated using five machine learning algorithms, Random Forest (RF), XGboost, perceptron, convolutional neural network, and Long Short-Term Memory, were calculated and compared using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) values and an external validation dataset.ResultsThe machine learning model generated using the RF algorithm showed the best performance. Its AUROC was 0.922, which is much better than the 0.8408 of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II. Thus, to investigate the importance of variables that influence the performance of the machine learning model, machine learning models were generated for each observation time or vital sign using the RF algorithm. The machine learning model developed using SpO2 showed the best performance (AUROC, 0.89). ConclusionsThe mortality prediction model developed in this study using data from only four types of commonly recorded vital signs is simpler than any existing mortality prediction model. This simple yet powerful new mortality prediction model could be useful for early detection of probable mortality and appropriate medical intervention, especially in rapidly deteriorating patients.


Heart & Lung ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sofia Fika ◽  
Serafeim Nanas ◽  
Georgios Baltopoulos ◽  
Efstratia Charitidou ◽  
Pavlos Myrianthefs

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (7) ◽  
pp. 2268-2269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tara Lagu ◽  
Thomas L. Higgins ◽  
Brian H. Nathanson ◽  
Peter K. Lindenauer

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 84 (4) ◽  
pp. A96-A96
Author(s):  
J. F. L.

KENNETT SQUARE, Pa.—Nearly as rare as the colt that grows up to be a racing champion is the birth of twin foals. Yet a tiny and brave filly and her weaker twin brother grow stronger every day here in an intensive care unit for newborn horses. Established in 1983 and directed . . . by Dr. Wendy E. Vaala, a . . . veterinarian, the University of Pennsylvania's intensive care unit for foals was built. . . . It is one of only seven such units in the country, and they have led to the development of a new specialty in veterinary medicine—equine neonatology. Recipes for formula fed to foals were borrowed from those used at the University of Pennsylvania Hospital in Philadelphia. The intensive care unit uses ultrasound equipment, heart monitors and other devices commonly used in human neonatal medicine. Treatments for infections, poisoning, ulcers, birth defects, even difficult births were adopted from human medicine. . . . But there are no incubators. . . .The foals are too active.


2019 ◽  
Vol 09 (01) ◽  
pp. 42-50
Author(s):  
Camara Youssouf ◽  
Ba Hamidou Oumar ◽  
Sangare Ibrahima ◽  
Toure Karamba ◽  
Coulibaly Souleymane ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document