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
. 2012 Jan;38(1):40-6.
doi: 10.1007/s00134-011-2390-2. Epub 2011 Oct 28.

Effect of changes over time in the performance of a customized SAPS-II model on the quality of care assessment

Affiliations

Effect of changes over time in the performance of a customized SAPS-II model on the quality of care assessment

Lilian Minne et al. Intensive Care Med. 2012 Jan.

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of our study was to explore, using an innovative method, the effect of temporal changes in the mortality prediction performance of an existing model on the quality of care assessment. The prognostic model (rSAPS-II) was a recalibrated Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II model developed for very elderly Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients.

Methods: The study population comprised all 12,143 consecutive patients aged 80 years and older admitted between January 2004 and July 2009 to one of the ICUs of 21 Dutch hospitals. The prospective dataset was split into 30 equally sized consecutive subsets. Per subset, we measured the model's discrimination [area under the curve (AUC)], accuracy (Brier score), and standardized mortality ratio (SMR), both without and after repeated recalibration. All performance measures were considered to be stable if <2 consecutive points fell outside the green zone [mean ± 2 standard deviation (SD)] and none fell outside the yellow zone (mean ± 4SD) of pre-control charts. We compared proportions of hospitals with SMR>1 without and after repeated recalibration for the year 2009.

Results: For all subsets, the AUCs were stable, but the Brier scores and SMRs were not. The SMR was downtrending, achieving levels significantly below 1. Repeated recalibration rendered it stable again. The proportions of hospitals with SMR>1 and SMR<1 changed from 15 versus 85% to 35 versus 65%.

Conclusions: Variability over time may markedly vary among different performance measures, and infrequent model recalibration can result in improper assessment of the quality of care in many hospitals. We stress the importance of the timely recalibration and repeated validation of prognostic models over time.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the rSAPS-II over time. Means and standard deviations (SD) are based on the bootstrap sample distribution obtained by taking 3000 samples of size 405 from the internal validation set. rSAPS-II Model developed for assessing the quality of care based on the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Brier scores of rSAPS-II over time. Means and standard deviations (SD) are based on the bootstrap sample distribution obtained by taking 3000 samples of size 405 from the internal validation set
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Standardized mortality ratio (SMR) of rSAPS-II over time. Means and standard deviations (SD) are based on the bootstrap sample distribution obtained by taking 3000 samples of size 405 from the internal validation set
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Mortality over time
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Mean age over time

Comment in

  • How standard is the "S" in SMR?
    Chase JG, Shaw GM. Chase JG, et al. Intensive Care Med. 2012 Jan;38(1):1-3. doi: 10.1007/s00134-011-2392-0. Epub 2011 Oct 28. Intensive Care Med. 2012. PMID: 22033710 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. Lucas PJ, Abu-Hanna A. Prognostic methods in medicine. Artif Intell Med. 2009;15:105–119. doi: 10.1016/S0933-3657(98)00047-5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Abu-Hanna A, Lucas PJ. Prognostic models in medicine. AI and statistical approaches. Methods Inf Med. 2001;40:1–5. - PubMed
    1. Zimmerman D. Benchmarking: measuring yourself against the best. Trustee. 1999;52:22–23. - PubMed
    1. Zimmerman JE, Alzola C, Von Rueden KT. The use of benchmarking to identify top performing critical care units: a preliminary assessment of their policies and practices. J Crit Care. 2003;18:76–86. doi: 10.1053/jcrc.2003.50005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Moons KG, Royston P, Vergouwe Y, Grobbee DE, Altman DG. Prognosis and prognostic research: what, why, and how? Br Med J. 2009;338:b375. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b375. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types