Better prognostic marker in ICU - APACHE II, SOFA or SAP II!

Abstract

Objectives: This study was designed to determine the comparative efficacy of different scoring system in assessing the prognosis of critically ill patients.

Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted in medical intensive care unit (MICU) and high dependency unit (HDU) Medical Unit III, Civil Hospital, from April 2012 to August 2012. All patients over age 16 years old who have fulfilled the criteria for MICU admission were included. Predictive mortality of APACHE II, SAP II and SOFA were calculated. Calibration and discrimination were used for validity of each scoring model.

Results: A total of 96 patients with equal gender distribution were enrolled. The average APACHE II score in non-survivors (27.97+8.53) was higher than survivors (15.82+8.79) with statistically significant p value (<0.001). The average SOFA score in non-survivors (9.68+4.88) was higher than survivors (5.63+3.63) with statistically significant p value (<0.001). SAP II average score in non-survivors (53.71+19.05) was higher than survivors (30.18+16.24) with statistically significant p value (<0.001).

Conclusion: All three tested scoring models (APACHE II, SAP II and SOFA) would be accurate enough for a general description of our ICU patients. APACHE II has showed better calibration and discrimination power than SAP II and SOFA.

doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.325.10080

How to cite this:Naqvi IH, Mahmood K, Ziaullaha S, Kashif SM, Sharif A. Better prognostic marker in ICU - APACHE II, SOFA or SAP II!. Pak J Med Sci. 2016;32(5):1146-1151.   doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.325.10080

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.