KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 3

SAPS III or APACHE IV: Which score to choose for acute trauma patients in intensive care unit?

Yoğun bakımdaki akut travma hastalarında hangi skoru seçmeliyiz: SAPS III mü, APACHE IV mü?

Melike KORKMAZ TOKER
Aykan GÜLLEROĞLU
Ayşe Gül KARABAY
İlhan GÜney BİÇER
Yavuz DEMİRARAN
Sayfa
247–252
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

CONCLUSION: The performance of the SAPS III was more sensitive and discriminative than the APACHE IV scoring system for multi-trauma ICU patients.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) III and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV in the prediction of in-hospital mortality in surviving multitrauma patients.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:METHODS: This study was conducted in the 13-bed intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary hospital.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:CONCLUSION: The performance of the SAPS III was more sensitive and discriminative than the APACHE IV scoring system for multi-trauma ICU patients.
🔬Tür:Literatür & Derleme Çalışması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) III and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV in the prediction of in-hospital mortality in surviving multitrauma patients. METHODS: This study was conducted in the 13-bed intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary hospital. A retrospective review of multitrauma patients whose care was managed in the ICU was performed. Data collection included details of age, gender, ICU admission, and outcome. APACHE IV and SAPS III scores, as well as the predicted mortality rate (PMR), were calculated using web-based calculators. RESULTS: Of the 90 patients 20% (n=18) were female and 80% (n=72) were male. The overall mortality rate was 25.6%. The mean APACHE IV, Acute Physiology Score (APS) and SAPS III score was 69.27±34.51, 66.42±33.72, and 26.36±27.14, respectively. The mean PMR according to the APACHE IV and the SAPS III was 26.36±27.14 and 17.07±24.88, respectively. The area under the curve result of receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was 0.87 for the APACHE IV and 0.93 for the SAPS III. CONCLUSION: The performance of the SAPS III was more sensitive and discriminative than the APACHE IV scoring system for multi-trauma ICU patients.

Abstract

AMAÇ: Çalışmanın amacı, hayatta kalan çoklu travma hastalarında basitleştirilmiş akut fizyoloji skoru (SAPS) III ve akut fizyoloji ve kronik sağlık değerlendirmesi (APACHE) IV’ün mortaliteyi öngörmedeki etkinliğini değerlendirmektir. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Bu çalışma üçüncü basamak bir hastanenin 13 yataklı yoğun bakım ünitesinde (YBÜ) gerçekleştirildi. YBÜ’de tedavi edilen çoklu travma hastalarının geriye dönük bir incelemesi yapıldı. Toplanan veriler yaş, cinsiyet, yoğun bakım kabul ve yoğun bakımdaki sonuçları içeriyordu. APACHE IV, SAPS III ve öngörülen mortalite oranı web tabanlı bir hesap makinasıyla hesaplandı. BULGULAR: Doksan hastanın %20’si (n=18) kadın, %80’i (n=72) erkekti. Genel mortalite oranı %25.6 idi. APACHE IV, APS ve SAPS III puan ortalamaları 69.27±34.51, 66.42±33.72 ve 26.36±27.14 bulundu. APACHE IV ve SAPS III’e göre ortalama öngörülen mortalite oranı 26.36±27.14 ve 17.07±24.88 idi. Eğrinin altındaki alan (EAA) sırasıyla APACHE IV ve SAPS III için 0.87, 0.93 idi. TARTIŞMA: Çoklu travmalı yoğun bakım hasta grubunda, SAPS III’ün performansı APACHE IV skoruna göre daha hassas ve ayırt edicidir

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

TOKER, M. K., GÜLLEROĞLU, A., KARABAY, A. G., BİÇER, İ. G., DEMİRARAN, Y. (2019). SAPS III or APACHE IV: Which score to choose for acute trauma patients in intensive care unit?. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 3, 247–252. https://ajindex.com/articles/323942

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Curry N, Hopewell S, Dorée C, Hyde C, Brohi K, Stanworth S. The acute management of trauma hemorrhage: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Crit Care 2011;15:R92
  2. Böhmer AB, Just KS, Lefering R, Paffrath T, Bouillon B, Joppich R, et al. Factors influencing lengths of stay in the intensive care unit for survivingtrauma patients: a retrospective analysis of 30,157 cases. Crit Care 2014;18:R143
  3. Lefering R, Nienaber U, Paffrath T. TraumaRegister DGU® of the German Trauma Society. Notf Rett Med 2013;16:269–73
  4. Zimmerman JE, Kramer AA, McNair DS, Malila FM. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV: hospital mortality assessment for today’s critically ill patients. Crit Care Med 2006;34:1297– 310
  5. Vincent JL, Moreno R. Clinical review: scoring systems in the critically ill. Crit Care 2010;14:207
  6. Livingston BM, MacKirdy FN, Howie JC, Jones R, Norrie JD. Assessment of the performance of five intensive care scoring models within a large Scottish database. Crit Care Med 2000;28:1820–7
  7. Kuzniewicz MW, Vasilevskis EE, Lane R, Dean ML, Trivedi NG, Rennie DJ, et al. Variation in ICU risk-adjusted mortality: impact of methods of assessment and potential confounders. Chest 2008;133:1319–27
  8. Moon SH, Kim JW, Byun JH, Kim SH, Choi JY, Jang IS, et al. The thorax trauma severity score and the trauma and injury severity score: Do they predict in-hospital mortality in patients with severe thoracic trauma?: A retrospective cohort study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017;96:e8317
  9. Honarmand A, Safavi M. The new Injury Severity Score: a more accurate predictor of need ventilator and time ventilated in trauma patients than the Injury Severity Score. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 2008;14:110–7
  10. Orhon R, Eren SH, Karadayı S, Korkmaz I, Coşkun A, Eren M, et al. Comparison of trauma scores for predicting mortality and morbidity on trauma patients. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 2014;20:258–64
  11. Schluter PJ, Cameron CM, Davey TM, Civil I, Orchard J, Dansey R, et al. Using Trauma Injury Severity Score (TRISS) variables to predict length of hospital stay following trauma in New Zealand. N Z Med J 2009;122:65–78
  12. Parajuli BD, Shrestha GS, Pradhan B, Amatya R. Comparison of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation IV to predict intensive care unit mortality. Indian J Crit Care Med 2015;19:87–91
  13. Brinkman S, Bakhshi-Raiez F, Abu-Hanna A, de Jonge E, Bosman RJ, Peele