Evaluation of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III predictions of hospital mortality in an independent database
- 1 August 1998
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Critical Care Medicine
- Vol. 26 (8), 1317-1326
- https://doi.org/10.1097/00003246-199808000-00012
Abstract
To assess the accuracy and validity of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III hospital mortality predictions in an independent sample of U.S. intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. Nonrandomized, observational, cohort study. Two hundred eighty-five ICUs in 161 U.S. hospitals, including 65 members of the Council of Teaching Hospitals and 64 nonteaching hospitals. A consecutive sample of 37,668 ICU admissions during 1993 to 1996; including 25,448 admissions at hospitals with >or=to400 beds and 1,074 admissions at hospitals with <200 beds. None. We used demographic, clinical, and physiologic information recorded during ICU day 1 and the APACHE III Equation topredict the probability of hospital mortality for each patient. We compared observed and predicted mortality for all admissions and across patient subgroups and assessed predictive accuracy using tests of discrimination and calibration. Aggregate hospital death rate was 12.35% and predicted hospital death rate was 12.27% (p = .541). The model discriminated between survivors and nonsurvivors well (area under receiver operating curve = 0.89). A calibration curve showed that the observed number of hospital deaths was close to the number of deaths predicted by the model, but when tested across deciles of risk, goodness-of-fit (Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic, chi-square = 48.71, 8 degrees of freedom, p < .0001) was not perfect. Observed and predicted hospital mortality rates were not significantly (p < .01) different for 55 (84.6%) of APACHE III's 65 specific ICU admission diagnoses and for 11 (84.6%) of the 13 residual organ system-related categories. The most frequent diagnoses with significant (p < .01) differences between observed and predicted hospital mortality rates included acute myocardial infarction, drug overdose, nonoperative head trauma, and nonoperative multiple trauma. APACHE III accurately predicted aggregate hospital mortality in an independent sample of U.S. ICU admissions. Further improvements in calibration can be achieved by more precise disease labeling, improved acquisition and weighting of neurologic abnormalities, adjustments that reflect changes in treatment outcomes over time, and a larger national database. (Crit Care Med 1998; 26:1317-1326)Keywords
This publication has 55 references indexed in Scilit:
- Factors affecting the performance of the models in the Mortality Probability Model II system and strategies of customizationCritical Care Medicine, 1996
- Modeling the Severity of Illness of ICU PatientsPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1994
- Intensive Care Societyʼs Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) study in Britain and IrelandCritical Care Medicine, 1994
- A New Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) Based on a European/North American Multicenter StudyJAMA, 1993
- Intensive Care Society's APACHE II study in Britain and Ireland--II: Outcome comparisons of intensive care units after adjustment for case mix by the American APACHE II method.BMJ, 1993
- Intensive Care Society's APACHE II study in Britain and Ireland--I: Variations in case mix of adult admissions to general intensive care units and impact on outcome.BMJ, 1993
- Predicting Outcome after ICU AdmissionChest, 1992
- Reliability of a measure of severity of illness: Acute physiology of chronic health evaluation—IIJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1992
- The APACHE III Prognostic SystemChest, 1991
- Clinical Prediction RulesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1985