APACHE IV Versus PPI for Predicting Community Hospital ICU Mortality

Abstract

Background: Both the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV and Palliative Performance Index (PPI) are scales used to estimate intensive care unit (ICU) prognosis and mortality. Objective: To Compare the diagnostic utility of the PPI and APACHE IV and their subsequent implications in predicting ICU mortality at a community hospital. Design: This was a Prospective Cohort Study. Setting: The study was conducted at the Community hospital ICU. Patients: Participants were 211 patients admitted from December 24, 2008 to June 11, 2009. Measurements: An observer gathered appropriate data and performed the APACHE IV and PPI scales within 24 hours of admission. Results were then analyzed using standard formulae. Results: The study included 211 participants in total with 211 participants in the PPI group (n = 211) and 162 in the APACHE IV group (n = 162). The APACHE score and PPI were found to be significant for predicting ICU mortality (P value of P < .002 and 99% CI of 13.74 to 20.32, P value of P < .001and 99% CI of 3.70 to 4.61, respectively). APACHE IV demonstrated a sensitivity of 84.6%, specificity of 96.0%, PPV of 64.7%, and NPV of 98.6%. In contrast, the PPI possessed a sensitivity of 69.2%, specificity of 96.0%, PPV of 64.7%, and NPV of 97.8%. Limitations: Limitations may have occurred with the subjective nature of the PPI and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), along with meeting criterion for the APACHE IV. Conclusion: This prospective cohort study in the ICU of a community hospital demonstrated that both the APACHE IV and PPI were significant tools for predicting ICU mortality. When contrasting the 2 scales, the APACHE IV could more accurately rule in mortality when mortality occurred and rule out mortality when survival occurred.

Keywords

APACHE IV PPI ICU

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Le Gall JR , Lemeshow S. , Saulnier F. A new Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study. JAMA. 1993;270(24):2957-2963.

Vincent JL , Moreno R. , Takala J. , et al., for the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure . Intensive Care Med. 1996;22(7):707-710.

Lemeshow S. , Teres D. , Klar J. , Avrunin JS , Gehlbach SH , Rapoport J. Mortality Probability Models (MPM II) based on an international cohort of intensive care unit patients. JAMA. 1993;270(20):2478-2486.

Knaus WA , Draper EA , Wagner DP , Zimmerman JE Apache II : a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med . 1985;13(10):818-829.

Brannen AL 2nd , Godfrey LJ , Goetter WE Prediction of outcome from critical illness. A comparison of clinical judgment with a prediction rule. Arch Intern Med. 1989;149(5):1083-1086.

Kruse JA , Thill-Baharozian MC , Carlson RW. Comparison of clinical assessment with APACHE II for predicting mortality risk in patients admitted to a medical intensive care unit. JAMA. 1988;260(12):1739-1742.

McClish DK , Powell SH How well can physicians estimate mortality in a medical intensive care unit ? Med Decis Making. 1989;9(2):125-132.

Lemeshow S. , Teres D. , Avrunin JS , Gage RW Refining intensive care unit outcome prediction by using changing probabilities of mortality. Crit Care Med. 1988;16(5):470-477.

Knaus WA , Wagner DP , Draper EA , et al. The APACHE III prognostic system. Risk prediction of hospital mortality for critically ill hospitalized adults. Chest. 1991;100(6):1619-1636.

10.

Vassar MJ , Wilkerson CL , Duran PJ , Perry CA , Holcroft JW Comparison of APACHE II, TRISS, and a proposed 24-hour ICU point system for prediction of outcome in ICU trauma patients. J Trauma. 1992;32(4):490-499;discussion 499-500.

11.

Lemeshow S. , Klar J. , Teres D. , et al. Mortality probability models for patients in the intensive care unit for 48 or 72 hours: a prospective, multicenter study. Crit Care Med. 1994;22(9):1351-1358.

12.

Castella X. , Artigas A. , Bion J. , Kari A.

A comparison of severity of illness scoring systems for intensive care unit patients: results of a multicenter, multinational study. The European/North American Severity Study Group

Crit Care Med. 1995;23(8):1327-1335.

13.

Beck DH , Taylor BL , Millar B. , Smith GB. Prediction of outcome from intensive care: a prospective cohort study comparing Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and III prognostic systems in a United Kingdom intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 1997;25(1):9-15.

14.

Cowen JS , Kelley MA Errors and bias in using predictive scoring systems. Crit Care Clin. 1994;10(1):53-72.

15.

Anderson F. , Downing GM , Hill J. , Casorso L. , Lerch N. Palliative performance scale (PPS): a new tool. J Palliat Care. 1996;12(1): 5-11.

16.

Morita T. , Tsunoda J. , Inoue S. , Chihara S. Validity of the palliative performance scale from a survival perspective. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1999;18(1):2-3.

17.

Morita T. , Tsunoda J. , Inoue S. , Chihara S. The Palliative Prognostic Index: a scoring system for survival prediction of terminally ill cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 1999;7(3): 128-133.