Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2001;5(1):31-6.
doi: 10.1186/cc975. Epub 2001 Jan 5.

Performance of the score systems Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and III at an interdisciplinary intensive care unit, after customization

Affiliations

Performance of the score systems Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and III at an interdisciplinary intensive care unit, after customization

R Markgraf et al. Crit Care. 2001.

Abstract

Background: Mortality predictions calculated using scoring scales are often not accurate in populations other than those in which the scales were developed because of differences in case-mix. The present study investigates the effect of first-level customization, using a logistic regression technique, on discrimination and calibration of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and III scales.

Method: Probabilities of hospital death for patients were estimated by applying APACHE II and III and comparing these with observed outcomes. Using the split sample technique, a customized model to predict outcome was developed by logistic regression. The overall goodness-of-fit of the original and the customized models was assessed.

Results: Of 3383 consecutive intensive care unit (ICU) admissions over 3 years, 2795 patients could be analyzed, and were split randomly into development and validation samples. The discriminative powers of APACHE II and III were unchanged by customization (areas under the receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve 0.82 and 0.85, respectively). Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit tests showed good calibration for APACHE II, but insufficient calibration for APACHE III. Customization improved calibration for both models, with a good fit for APACHE III as well. However, fit was different for various subgroups.

Conclusions: The overall goodness-of-fit of APACHE III mortality prediction was improved significantly by customization, but uniformity of fit in different subgroups was not achieved. Therefore, application of the customized model provides no advantage, because differences in case-mix still limit comparisons of quality of care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Calibration curves for APACHE II and APACHE III before and after customization for development and validation samples. The diagonal line is the line of ideal correspondence between observed and expected mortality. The solid line represents the development sample and the dotted line the validation sample. Case numbers for the development sample are represented by white bars, and those of the validation sample by grey bars.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bodmann KF, Ehlers B, Häbel U, Ritschel P, Rühmkorf K. Epidemiologic and prognostic data of 2054 patients in a medical intensive care unit. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1997;122:919–925. - PubMed
    1. Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. An evaluation of outcome from intensive care in major medical centers. Ann Intern Med. 1986;104:410–418. - PubMed
    1. Shortell SM, Zimmerman JE, Rousseau DM, Gillies RR, Wagner DP, Draper EA, Knaus WA, Duffy J. The performance of intensive care units: does good management make a difference? Med Care. 1994;32:508–525. - PubMed
    1. 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;25:9–15. - PubMed
    1. Moreno R, Miranda DR, Fidler V, Van Schilfgaarde R. Evaluation of two outcome prediction models on an independent database. Crit Care Med. 1998;26:50–61. - PubMed