• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分系统IV(APACHE IV)模型的验证及其与急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分系统II(APACHE II)、简化急性生理学评分系统3(SAPS 3)和韩国简化急性生理学评分系统3(Korean SAPS 3)模型在韩国外科重症监护病房预测医院死亡率方面的比较。

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.

作者信息

Lee Hannah, Shon Yoon-Jung, Kim Hyerim, Paik Hyesun, Park Hee-Pyoung

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

Korean J Anesthesiol. 2014 Aug;67(2):115-22. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2014.67.2.115. Epub 2014 Aug 26.

DOI:10.4097/kjae.2014.67.2.115
PMID:25237448
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4166383/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV model has not yet been validated in Korea. The aim of this study was to compare the ability of the APACHE IV with those of APACHE II, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) 3, and Korean SAPS 3 in predicting hospital mortality in a surgical intensive care unit (SICU) population.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed electronic medical records for patients admitted to the SICU from March 2011 to February 2012 in a university hospital. Measurements of discrimination and calibration were performed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, respectively. We calculated the standardized mortality ratio (SMR, actual mortality predicted mortality) for the four models.

RESULTS

The study included 1,314 patients. The hospital mortality rate was 3.3%. The discriminative powers of all models were similar and very reliable. The AUCs were 0.80 for APACHE IV, 0.85 for APACHE II, 0.86 for SAPS 3, and 0.86 for Korean SAPS 3. Hosmer and Lemeshow C and H statistics showed poor calibration for all of the models (P < 0.05). The SMRs of APACHE IV, APACHE II, SAPS 3, and Korean SAPS 3 were 0.21, 0.11 0.23, 0.34, and 0.25, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The APACHE IV revealed good discrimination but poor calibration. The overall discrimination and calibration of APACHE IV were similar to those of APACHE II, SAPS 3, and Korean SAPS 3 in this study. A high level of customization is required to improve calibration in this study setting.

摘要

背景

急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE)IV模型尚未在韩国得到验证。本研究的目的是比较APACHE IV与APACHE II、简化急性生理学评分(SAPS)3以及韩国SAPS 3在预测外科重症监护病房(SICU)患者医院死亡率方面的能力。

方法

我们回顾性分析了2011年3月至2012年2月在一家大学医院SICU住院患者的电子病历。分别使用受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)和Hosmer-Lemeshow检验进行区分度和校准测量。我们计算了这四种模型的标准化死亡率比值(SMR,实际死亡率/预测死亡率)。

结果

该研究纳入了1314例患者。医院死亡率为3.3%。所有模型的区分能力相似且非常可靠。APACHE IV的AUC为0.80,APACHE II为0.85,SAPS 3为0.86,韩国SAPS 3为0.86。Hosmer和Lemeshow C及H统计量显示所有模型的校准效果均较差(P < 0.05)。APACHE IV、APACHE II、SAPS 3和韩国SAPS 3的SMR分别为0.21、0.11、0.23、0.34和0.25。

结论

APACHE IV显示出良好的区分度但校准效果较差。在本研究中,APACHE IV的整体区分度和校准与APACHE II、SAPS 3和韩国SAPS 3相似。在本研究环境中,需要高度定制化以改善校准。

相似文献

1
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.急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分系统IV(APACHE IV)模型的验证及其与急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分系统II(APACHE II)、简化急性生理学评分系统3(SAPS 3)和韩国简化急性生理学评分系统3(Korean SAPS 3)模型在韩国外科重症监护病房预测医院死亡率方面的比较。
Korean J Anesthesiol. 2014 Aug;67(2):115-22. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2014.67.2.115. Epub 2014 Aug 26.
2
Performance of three prognostic models in patients with cancer in need of intensive care in a medical center in China.中国某医疗中心中,三种预后模型在需要重症监护的癌症患者中的表现。
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 25;10(6):e0131329. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131329. eCollection 2015.
3
Evaluation and Validation of Four Scoring Systems: the APACHE IV, SAPS III, MPM0 II, and ICMM in Critically Ill Cancer Patients.四种评分系统的评估与验证:急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统IV(APACHE IV)、序贯器官衰竭评估(SAPS III)、第二代多器官功能不全评分(MPM0 II)以及危重症癌症患者综合评分(ICMM)
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2020 Apr;24(4):263-269. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23407.
4
Comparison of the performance of SAPS II, SAPS 3, APACHE II, and their customized prognostic models in a surgical intensive care unit.外科重症监护病房中急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统II(SAPS II)、急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统3(SAPS 3)、急性生理和慢性健康评价II(APACHE II)及其定制预后模型的性能比较。
Br J Anaesth. 2008 Dec;101(6):798-803. doi: 10.1093/bja/aen291. Epub 2008 Oct 9.
5
A comparison of Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III scoring system in predicting mortality and length of stay at surgical intensive care unit.简化急性生理学评分II、急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估II及急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估III评分系统在预测外科重症监护病房死亡率及住院时间方面的比较
Niger Med J. 2014 Mar;55(2):144-7. doi: 10.4103/0300-1652.129651.
6
Performance of Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3 In Predicting Hospital Mortality In Emergency Intensive Care Unit.简化急性生理学评分3在预测急诊重症监护病房患者医院死亡率中的表现
Chin Med J (Engl). 2017 Jul 5;130(13):1544-1551. doi: 10.4103/0366-6999.208250.
7
Assessment of six mortality prediction models in patients admitted with severe sepsis and septic shock to the intensive care unit: a prospective cohort study.对入住重症监护病房的严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者的六种死亡率预测模型的评估:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Crit Care. 2003 Oct;7(5):R116-22. doi: 10.1186/cc2373. Epub 2003 Aug 28.
8
Validation of the Sepsis Severity Score Compared with Updated Severity Scores in Predicting Hospital Mortality in Sepsis Patients.脓毒症严重程度评分与更新后的严重程度评分在预测脓毒症患者医院死亡率方面的验证
Shock. 2017 Jun;47(6):720-725. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000000818.
9
The Ability of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV Score to Predict Mortality in a Single Tertiary Hospital.急性生理与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE)IV评分在某三级医院预测死亡率的能力。
Korean J Crit Care Med. 2017 Aug;32(3):275-283. doi: 10.4266/kjccm.2016.00990. Epub 2017 Aug 31.
10
Assessment of performance of four mortality prediction systems in a Saudi Arabian intensive care unit.沙特阿拉伯重症监护病房中四种死亡率预测系统的性能评估。
Crit Care. 2002 Apr;6(2):166-74. doi: 10.1186/cc1477. Epub 2002 Mar 13.

引用本文的文献

1
Development and validation of novel simple prognostic model for predicting mortality in Korean intensive care units using national insurance claims data.利用国家保险理赔数据开发和验证用于预测韩国重症监护病房死亡率的新型简单预后模型。
Korean J Intern Med. 2024 Jul;39(4):625-639. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2022.311. Epub 2024 Apr 19.
2
Comparison of APACHE II and APACHE IV score as predictors of mortality in patients with septic shock in intensive care unit: A prospective observational study.比较急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统II(APACHE II)和急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统IV(APACHE IV)作为重症监护病房感染性休克患者死亡率预测指标的研究:一项前瞻性观察性研究。
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2023 Jul-Sep;39(3):355-359. doi: 10.4103/joacp.joacp_380_21. Epub 2022 Oct 12.
3

本文引用的文献

1
SAPS 3, APACHE IV or GRACE: which score to choose for acute coronary syndrome patients in intensive care units?序贯器官衰竭评估系统3(SAPS 3)、急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统IV(APACHE IV)还是全球急性冠状动脉事件注册研究(GRACE)评分:重症监护病房中的急性冠状动脉综合征患者应选择哪种评分系统?
Sao Paulo Med J. 2013;131(3):173-8. doi: 10.1590/1516-3180.2013.1313474.
2
Validation of SAPS3 admission score and its customization for use in Korean intensive care unit patients: a prospective multicentre study.SAPS3 入院评分的验证及其在韩国重症监护病房患者中的定制应用:一项前瞻性多中心研究。
Respirology. 2013 Aug;18(6):989-95. doi: 10.1111/resp.12115.
3
Comparison of APACHE III, APACHE IV, SAPS 3, and MPM0III and influence of resuscitation status on model performance.
Validation of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and IV Score in COVID-19 Patients.急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE)II 及 IV 评分在 COVID-19 患者中的验证
Crit Care Res Pract. 2021 Jun 19;2021:5443083. doi: 10.1155/2021/5443083. eCollection 2021.
4
Evaluation and Validation of Four Scoring Systems: the APACHE IV, SAPS III, MPM0 II, and ICMM in Critically Ill Cancer Patients.四种评分系统的评估与验证:急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统IV(APACHE IV)、序贯器官衰竭评估(SAPS III)、第二代多器官功能不全评分(MPM0 II)以及危重症癌症患者综合评分(ICMM)
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2020 Apr;24(4):263-269. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23407.
5
Performance of APACHE IV in Medical Intensive Care Unit Patients: Comparisons with APACHE II, SAPS 3, and MPM III.急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分系统IV(APACHE IV)在医学重症监护病房患者中的应用:与急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分系统II(APACHE II)、序贯器官衰竭评估(SAPS 3)和死亡率预测模型III(MPM III)的比较
Acute Crit Care. 2018 Nov;33(4):216-221. doi: 10.4266/acc.2018.00178. Epub 2018 Nov 21.
6
The Ability of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV Score to Predict Mortality in a Single Tertiary Hospital.急性生理与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE)IV评分在某三级医院预测死亡率的能力。
Korean J Crit Care Med. 2017 Aug;32(3):275-283. doi: 10.4266/kjccm.2016.00990. Epub 2017 Aug 31.
7
The Role of Oliguria and the Absence of Fluid Administration and Balance Information in Illness Severity Scores.少尿以及缺乏液体输注与平衡信息在疾病严重程度评分中的作用
Korean J Crit Care Med. 2017 May;32(2):106-123. doi: 10.4266/kjccm.2017.00192. Epub 2017 May 31.
8
Adjusting for Disease Severity Across ICUs in Multicenter Studies.调整多中心研究中各 ICU 的疾病严重程度。
Crit Care Med. 2019 Aug;47(8):e662-e668. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003822.
9
Mortality Prediction Using Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV Scoring Systems: Is There a Difference?使用急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估II和急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估IV评分系统进行死亡率预测:有差异吗?
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2018 May;22(5):332-335. doi: 10.4103/ijccm.IJCCM_422_17.
10
Value of SOFA, APACHE IV and SAPS II scoring systems in predicting short-term mortality in patients with acute myocarditis.SOFA、APACHE IV和SAPS II评分系统在预测急性心肌炎患者短期死亡率中的价值。
Oncotarget. 2017 Jun 27;8(38):63073-63083. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.18634. eCollection 2017 Sep 8.
比较 APACHE III、APACHE IV、SAPS 3 和 MPM0III 以及复苏状态对模型性能的影响。
Chest. 2012 Oct;142(4):851-858. doi: 10.1378/chest.11-2164.
4
Caution when using prognostic models: a prospective comparison of 3 recent prognostic models.使用预后模型时需谨慎:3 种近期预后模型的前瞻性比较。
J Crit Care. 2012 Aug;27(4):423.e1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2011.08.016. Epub 2011 Oct 26.
5
Performance of the third-generation models of severity scoring systems (APACHE IV, SAPS 3 and MPM-III) in acute kidney injury critically ill patients.第三代严重程度评分系统(APACHE IV、SAPS 3 和 MPM-III)在急性肾损伤危重症患者中的表现。
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2011 Dec;26(12):3894-901. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfr201. Epub 2011 Apr 19.
6
External validation of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV in Dutch intensive care units and comparison with Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II.荷兰重症监护病房中急性生理学与慢性健康评估 IV 的外部验证,并与急性生理学与慢性健康评估 II 和简化急性生理学评分 II 进行比较。
J Crit Care. 2011 Feb;26(1):105.e11-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2010.07.007. Epub 2010 Sep 24.
7
Validation of four prognostic scores in patients with cancer admitted to Brazilian intensive care units: results from a prospective multicenter study.四项预后评分在巴西重症监护病房癌症患者中的验证:一项前瞻性多中心研究的结果。
Intensive Care Med. 2010 Jul;36(7):1188-95. doi: 10.1007/s00134-010-1807-7. Epub 2010 Mar 11.
8
The performance and customization of SAPS 3 admission score in a Thai medical intensive care unit.泰国重症监护病房 SAPS 3 入院评分的表现和定制。
Intensive Care Med. 2010 Feb;36(2):342-6. doi: 10.1007/s00134-009-1629-7. Epub 2009 Sep 15.
9
External validation of the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) 3 in a cohort of 28,357 patients from 147 Italian intensive care units.对来自 147 家意大利重症监护病房的 28357 例患者队列进行简化急性生理学评分(SAPS)3 的外部验证。
Intensive Care Med. 2009 Nov;35(11):1916-24. doi: 10.1007/s00134-009-1615-0. Epub 2009 Aug 14.
10
Comparison of the performance of SAPS II, SAPS 3, APACHE II, and their customized prognostic models in a surgical intensive care unit.外科重症监护病房中急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统II(SAPS II)、急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统3(SAPS 3)、急性生理和慢性健康评价II(APACHE II)及其定制预后模型的性能比较。
Br J Anaesth. 2008 Dec;101(6):798-803. doi: 10.1093/bja/aen291. Epub 2008 Oct 9.