• 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

对巴基斯坦阿迦汗大学开发的急性生理与慢性健康评估II评分系统软件的验证。

Validation of acute physiologic and chronic health evaluation II scoring system software developed at The Aga Khan University, Pakistan.

作者信息

Hashmi M, Asghar A, Shamim F, Khan F H

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesiology, Aga Khan University, Karachi 74800, Pakistan.

出版信息

Saudi J Anaesth. 2016 Jan-Mar;10(1):45-9. doi: 10.4103/1658-354X.169474.

DOI:10.4103/1658-354X.169474
PMID:26955310
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4760041/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess the predictive performance of Acute Physiologic and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) software available on the hospital intranet and analyze interrater reliability of calculating the APACHE II score by the gold standard manual method or automatically using the software.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An expert scorer not involved in the data collection had calculated APACHE II score of 213 patients admitted to surgical Intensive Care Unit using the gold standard manual method for a previous study performed in the department. The same data were entered into the computer software available on the hospital intranet (http://intranet/apacheii) to recalculate the APACHE II score automatically along with the predicted mortality. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit statistical test and Pearson's correlation coefficient was computed.

RESULTS

The 213 patients had an average APACHE II score of 17.20 ± 8.24, the overall mortality rate was 32.8% and standardized mortality ratio was 1.00. The area under the ROC curve of 0.827 was significantly >0.5 (P < 0.01) and had confidence interval of 0.77-0.88. The goodness-of-fit test showed a good calibration (H = 5.46, P = 0.71). Interrater reliability using Pearson's product moment correlations demonstrated a strong positive relationship between the computer and the manual expert scorer (r = 0.98, P = 0.0005).

CONCLUSION

APACHE II software available on the hospital's intranet has satisfactory calibration and discrimination and interrater reliability is good when compared with the gold standard manual method.

摘要

目的

评估医院内部网提供的急性生理与慢性健康状况评估系统II(APACHE II)软件的预测性能,并分析采用金标准手工方法或使用该软件自动计算APACHE II评分时的评分者间信度。

材料与方法

在之前该科室进行的一项研究中,一名未参与数据收集的专家评分者采用金标准手工方法计算了213例入住外科重症监护病房患者的APACHE II评分。将相同数据输入医院内部网(http://intranet/apacheii)上的计算机软件,以自动重新计算APACHE II评分及预测死亡率。计算受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)、Hosmer-Lemeshow拟合优度统计检验及Pearson相关系数。

结果

213例患者的APACHE II评分平均为17.20±8.24,总死亡率为32.8%,标准化死亡率为1.00。ROC曲线下面积为0.827,显著大于0.5(P<0.01),置信区间为0.77 - 0.88。拟合优度检验显示校准良好(H = 5.46,P = 0.71)。使用Pearson积矩相关性的评分者间信度表明,计算机与手工专家评分者之间存在强正相关关系(r = 0.98,P = 0.0005)。

结论

医院内部网提供的APACHE II软件具有令人满意的校准和区分能力,与金标准手工方法相比,评分者间信度良好。

相似文献

1
Validation of acute physiologic and chronic health evaluation II scoring system software developed at The Aga Khan University, Pakistan.对巴基斯坦阿迦汗大学开发的急性生理与慢性健康评估II评分系统软件的验证。
Saudi J Anaesth. 2016 Jan-Mar;10(1):45-9. doi: 10.4103/1658-354X.169474.
2
Performance evaluation of APACHE II score for an Indian patient with respiratory problems.用于评估印度呼吸疾病患者的急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分系统(APACHE II)的性能评价
Indian J Med Res. 2004 Jun;119(6):273-82.
3
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.
4
Comparison of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation IV (APACHE IV) severity of illness scoring systems, in a multidisciplinary ICU.多学科重症监护病房中急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估II(APACHE II)和急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估IV(APACHE IV)疾病严重程度评分系统的比较。
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Apr-Jun;33(2):248-253. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.209741.
5
Illness severity scoring for Intensive Care at Middlemore Hospital, New Zealand: past and future.新西兰米德尔莫尔医院重症监护的疾病严重程度评分:过去与未来。
N Z Med J. 2010 Jun 11;123(1316):47-65.
6
Comparative evaluation of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scoring systems in patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit.心脏重症监护病房住院患者急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统II和序贯器官衰竭评估评分系统的比较评价
J Crit Care. 2015 Aug;30(4):752-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.04.014. Epub 2015 Apr 24.
7
Prediction of outcome in intensive care unit trauma patients: a multicenter study of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE), Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), and a 24-hour intensive care unit (ICU) point system.重症监护病房创伤患者预后的预测:急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE)、创伤和损伤严重程度评分(TRISS)以及24小时重症监护病房(ICU)评分系统的多中心研究
J Trauma. 1999 Aug;47(2):324-9. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199908000-00017.
8
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.
9
Short-term and long-term outcome prediction with the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II system after orthotopic liver transplantation.原位肝移植后应用急性生理与慢性健康状况评估II系统进行短期和长期预后预测
Crit Care Med. 2000 Jan;28(1):150-6. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200001000-00025.
10
Assessment of the performance of five intensive care scoring models within a large Scottish database.在一个大型苏格兰数据库中对五种重症监护评分模型的性能评估。
Crit Care Med. 2000 Jun;28(6):1820-7. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200006000-00023.

引用本文的文献

1
Clinical Characteristics and Risk Factors for Critically Ill Patients with Carbapenem-Resistant (CrKP): A Cohort Study from Developing Country.耐碳青霉烯类肺炎克雷伯菌(CrKP)重症患者的临床特征及危险因素:一项来自发展中国家的队列研究
Infect Drug Resist. 2021 Dec 20;14:5555-5562. doi: 10.2147/IDR.S343489. eCollection 2021.
2
Performance of critical care prognostic scoring systems in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review.中低收入国家重症监护预后评分系统的表现:系统评价。
Crit Care. 2018 Jan 26;22(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s13054-017-1930-8.
3
Is APACHE II a useful tool for clinical research?

本文引用的文献

1
Severity of illness scoring systems in the intensive care unit.重症监护病房的疾病严重程度评分系统。
Crit Care Med. 2011 Jan;39(1):163-9. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181f96f81.
2
Inter-observer variability in APACHE II scoring: effect of strict guidelines and training.急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统(APACHE II)评分中的观察者间变异性:严格指南和培训的影响。
Intensive Care Med. 2001 Aug;27(8):1365-9. doi: 10.1007/s001340101012.
3
Accuracy and reliability of APACHE II scoring in two intensive care units Problems and pitfalls in the use of APACHE II and suggestions for improvement.
急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统II(APACHE II)是临床研究的有用工具吗?
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2017 Jul-Sep;29(3):264-267. doi: 10.5935/0103-507X.20170046.
两个重症监护病房中急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统(APACHE II)评分的准确性和可靠性:APACHE II使用中的问题与陷阱及改进建议
Anaesthesia. 2001 Jan;56(1):47-50. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2001.01763.x.
4
Interobserver variability in data collection of the APACHE II score in teaching and community hospitals.教学医院和社区医院中急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统(APACHE II)数据收集的观察者间变异性。
Crit Care Med. 1999 Sep;27(9):1999-2004. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199909000-00046.
5
Accuracy and efficiency of an automated system for calculating APACHE II scores in an intensive care unit.重症监护病房中用于计算急性生理学与慢性健康状况评分系统(APACHE II)分数的自动化系统的准确性和效率。
Proc AMIA Annu Fall Symp. 1997:131-5.
6
Errors and bias in using predictive scoring systems.使用预测评分系统时的误差与偏差。
Crit Care Clin. 1994 Jan;10(1):53-72.
7
APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system.急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统II:一种疾病严重程度分类系统。
Crit Care Med. 1985 Oct;13(10):818-29.