Elderly in the ICU

How to cite this article: Jagathkar G. Elderly in the ICU. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(3):157-158.

Serum total triiodothyronine (T3) as a predictor of mortality and morbidity in critically ill patients and its correlation of predictability with acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score: A prospective observational study

Background:

The aim is to assess the prognostic value of total T3, total T4, and thyroid-stimulating hormone among critically ill patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (ICU) in association with mortality and its correlation with the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) score.

METHODS

: Our prospective observational study consists of 257 patients without known thyroid diseases admitted to the medical ICU. The baseline characteristics of the patients were recorded, including the APACHE II score and thyroid hormone levels at ICU admission. Based on the primary outcome of mortality, we analyzed the data by appropriate statistical methods. A P < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results:

Of the 257 patients included in the study, 47 (18.28%) succumbed to their illnesses. A significant difference in T3 levels (P < 0.001), T4 levels (P < 0.001), and APACHE II score (P < 0.001) was found between the survivors and the nonsurvivors. There was negative correlation observed between T3 and APACHE II score (r = −0.448, P < 0.001) and T4 and APACHE II score (r = −0.221, P ≤ 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis determined T3 to be the only independent predictor of ICU mortality among thyroid hormones. The area under the curve (AUC) for T3 (0.811 ± 0.04) was almost equal to that of the APACHE II score (0.858 ± 0.029). The duration of ICU stay and hospital stay in patients with low T3 was significantly higher compared to patients with normal T3.

Conclusion:

Serum T3 is a good indicator for predicting mortality and morbidity among critically ill patients.

[Comparison of different critical care scoring systems in prognosis evaluation of heat stroke]

Objective: To evaluate the prognostic value of different critical care scoring systems in 28-day survival rate of patients with heat stroke. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 71 patients with heat stroke admitted to the department of emergency medicine of Beijing Luhe Hospital. Capital Medical University from July 2015 to September 2018. The general information and the worst values of vital signs and related pathophysiological indicators within 24 hours were collected and the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) , multiple organ dysfunction (MODS) , simplified acute physiological scoreⅡ (SAPS Ⅱ) and acute physiology and chronic health evaluationⅡ (APACHE Ⅱ) were calculated. The patients were divided into the survival group (n=45) and the non-survival group (n=26) according to 28-day prognosis, and the clinical data and scores of the two groups were compared.The ROC curve was drawn to analyze the evaluation value of each scoring system on the survival rate of patients at 28-day. Kaplan-Meier method was used to plot the survival curve of patients. Results: There were no significant differences in age, sex, vital signs and laboratory parameters between two groups (P>0.05) . In non-survival patients, SOFA, SAPS Ⅱ, APACHE Ⅱ scores were significantly elevated in the survival group (P<0.05) . ROC curve analysis showed that the area under ROC curve (AUC) of SOFA score for predicting 28-day survival rate was the highest, which was significantly higher than the APACHE Ⅱ, SAPS Ⅱ, MODS score. When the best cut-off value of SOFA score was 9.0, the sensitivity was 84.6%, and the specificity was 71.1%. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that 28-day survival rate after hospital discharge in patients with SOFA score<9 (n=27) was significantly higher than that in patients with SOFA score ≥9.0 (χ(2)=1.0, P<0.01) . Conclusion: SOFA, APACHE Ⅱ, SAPS Ⅱ on admission have been proved to have good prognostic ability to predict 28-day prognosis in heat stroke patients. Among them, SOFA score system has more accurate prediction value.

Impact of Critical Illness on Quality of Life after Intensive Care Unit Discharge

Objective

To assess the quality of life (QoL) following intensive care unit (ICU) discharge using 6 months’ prospective follow-up and to analyze the risk factors affecting quality-of-life post-discharge.

Design

A prospective observational cohort study. Conducted on adult patients, discharged from ICU after more than 7 days’ stay. Study duration is from January 2017 to October 2018. Patients <18 years, nonconsenting, preexisting neurological illness, and lost to follow-up were excluded. Follow-up was done at 1 and 6 months using the SF-36 questionnaire. The pre-ICU functional status, patient demographics, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) score, New York Health Evaluation (NYHA) classification, and details of ICU stay were collected.

Results

One hundred patients (M = 60, F = 40) with ICU stay (13.64 ± 3.75 days), days of mechanical ventilation (7.93 ± 3.89 days), admission APACHE II (18.88 ± 4.34) and SOFA (7.73 ± 1.54) scores. Comparison showed physical component summary (PCS) score and mental component summary (MCS) score at pre-ICU were 55.12 and 55.09 which decreased to 39.59 and 35.49 (p < 0.05) at 1 month post-discharge and 47.93 and 37.46 at 6 months. Age, APACHE II, and SOFA scores are the significant factors affecting PCS and MCS. Length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation did not affect significantly at 6 months. When compared with general population PCS and MCS showed significant deterioration at 1 and 6 months.

Conclusion

Post-ICU discharge patients have significant functional impairment and compromised health-related QoL (HRQoL). Age and severity of illness significantly affects health quality parameters and decline is below the normal data of general population.

How to cite this article

Rai R, Singh R, Azim A, et al. Impact of Critical Illness on Quality of Life after Intensive Care Unit Discharge. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(5):299–306.

Comparison of the Performance of APACHE II, SOFA, and mNUTRIC Scoring Systems in Critically Ill Patients: A 2-year Cross-sectional Study

Aims and objectives

Different severity scores are being used to assess outcomes in intensive care unit, but variable data had been reported so far per their performance. Main objective of this study is to compare performance of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II), sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), and modified nutrition risk in critically ill (mNUTRIC) scoring systems regarding the outcomes in the form of morbidity and mortality in medical intensive care unit (MICU) at rural tertiary-care health center.

Materials and methods

In this cross-sectional study, 1,990 patients older than 18 years admitted in the ICU were enrolled. Age, gender, diagnosis, intubation, comorbidities, APACHE II, SOFA scores, m NUTRIC score, MICU stays in days, and need of mechanical ventilation were noted.

Results

When we compared different score with mortality, APACHE-II was having sensitivity of 89.9% and specificity of 97.6%; SOFA had 90.1% sensitivity and 96.6% specificity; while mNUTRIC score had 97.2% sensitivity and 74.0% specificity. APACHE-II score had sensitivity of 93.4%, SOFA had 90.5%, and mNUTRIC score 92.3% with low specificity of 76.5% in predicting requirement of mechanical ventilation. mNUTRIC score and ICU length of stay showed moderate positive correlation (p value = <0.001).

Conclusion

All the three scores were comparable in sensitivity and specificity in predicting outcomes in the form of mortality, need of mechanical ventilation, and length of ICU stays. mNUTRIC score was more sensitive than others, and as it was based on nutritional status, hence more weightage should be given on this score.

How to cite this article

Kumar S, Gattani SC, Baheti AH, Dubey A. Comparison of the Performance of APACHE II, SOFA, and mNUTRIC Scoring Systems in Critically Ill Patients: A 2-year Cross-sectional Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(11):1057–1061.

A Comparison of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II Score and Serum Procalcitonin Change for Predicting Mortality in Acute Pancreatitis

Introduction

The prediction of mortality in acute pancreatitis (AP) is a useful estimate for effective treatment. Scoring systems such as acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II, computed tomography (CT) severity index (CTSI), bedside index of severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP), etc., are used for prediction. Biomarkers like C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) are also considered useful for prognostication. The aim of this retrospective study was to correlate the changes in serum PCT level with APACHE II score between admission and 48 hours as mortality predictor in AP.

Materials and methods

The observational study was conducted in a cohort of 42 patients admitted consecutively in the seven-bedded general intensive care unit (ICU) of our institute between June 2016 and May 2018, with the diagnosis of AP. The APACHE II score and serum PCT level at admission and 48 hours were retrieved from the hospital database. The change in APACHE II and PCT level was compared between ICU “survivors” and “nonsurvivors.” The predictive accuracy of APACHE II and PCT was measured using area under receiver–operator characteristics (ROC) curve. A p value <0.05 was considered as significant.

Results

Of the 42 patients enrolled, 30 patients (71.42%) were survivors and 12 (28.58%) were nonsurvivors. The median APACHE II score in nonsurvivors increased from 16 (7–19) to 23 (11–29) and remained unchanged at 16 (9–19 at admission; 10–22 at 48 hours) in survivors. The median PCT levels increased from 3.8 (1.2–5.6) to 6.2 (1.9–12.5) in nonsurvivors and decreased from 3.8 (1.2–5.6) to 2.2 (0.6–2.9) in survivors. Serum PCT change compared better than the APACHE II score change among survivors (r = 0.455, p = 0.011) with a mean (±standard deviation SD) change of 1.41 (±1.59).

Conclusion

The change in serum PCT and APACHE II between admission and 48 hours correlates well and is useful for mortality prediction in AP. Serum PCT change compares better than APACHE II score change in survivors.

How to cite this article

Choudhuri AH, Duggal S, Biswas PS, Uppal R. A Comparison of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II Score and Serum Procalcitonin Change for Predicting Mortality in Acute Pancreatitis. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(3):190–194.

Comparison of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, Modified Computed Tomography Severity Index, and Bedside Index for Severity in Acute Pancreatitis Score in Predicting the Severity of Acute Pancreatitis

Aims of this study

Severe acute pancreatitis has been defined recently based on the persistence of organ failure at 48 hours of admission. The bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) score, a simplified scoring system to predict severity of acute pancreatitis, is proposed to be useful in early risk stratification of acute pancreatitis. Our aim was to prospectively compare BISAP score with the already established acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) and modified computed tomography severity index (CTSI) scores in predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis.

Materials and methods

A total of 87 consecutive cases presenting with the first attack of acute pancreatitis were included in the study. Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II and BISAP scores were calculated from the worst parameters in the first 24 hours, and modified CTSI was reported at 48 hours of admission. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted, and predictive accuracy of each score was calculated from the area under the curve. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each score.

Results

A total of 20 patients (23%) had severe acute pancreatitis with a total of 11 mortalities (12.64%), 10 of them in the severe acute pancreatitis group. Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II, modified CTSI, and BISAP score all correlated well with each other. Modified CTSI and BISAP score also correlated with duration of hospital stay. Areas under the curve for APACHE II (≥8), modified CTSI (≥8), and BISAP score (≥2) were 0.826, 0.806, and 0.811, respectively, suggesting similar predictive accuracy.

Conclusion

The BISAP score was similar to APACHE II and modified CTSI in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and NPV. It is much easier to calculate and a useful risk stratification tool. It should be used for early triage and referral to a high dependency unit.

How to cite this article

Chatterjee R, Parab N, Sajjan B, Nagar VS. Comparison of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, Modified Computed Tomography Severity Index, and Bedside Index for Severity in Acute Pancreatitis Score in Predicting the Severity of Acute Pancreatitis. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(2):99-103.

Comparative analysis of APACHE-II and P-POSSUM scoring systems in predicting postoperative mortality in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy

BACKGROUND

Laparotomy remains one of the commonest emergency surgical procedures. Early prognostic evaluation would aid in selecting the high-risk patients for an aggressive treatment. Awareness about risks could potentially contribute to the quality of perioperative care and optimum utilization of resources. Portsmouth modification of Physiological and operative severity for the enumeration of mortality and morbidity (P-POSSUM) and the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE-II) have been the most widely used scoring systems for emergency laparotomies. It is always better to have a single scoring system to predict outcomes and audit healthcare organizations.

AIM

To compare the ability of APACHE-II and P-POSSUM to predict postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy.

METHODS

All patients undergoing emergency laparotomy at the Tata Main Hospital, Jamshedpur between December 2013 and November 2014 were included in the study. In this observational study, P-POSSUM and APACHE-II scoring were done, and the outcome analysis evaluated with mortality being the primary outcome.

RESULTS

For P-POSSUM, at a cut off value of 63 to predict mortality using receiver operating characteristics curve analysis, the area under the curve was 0.989; and for APACHE-II, at the cut off value of 24, the area under the curve was 0.965.

CONCLUSION

Because the ability of APACHE-II to predict mortality was similar to P-POSSUM and APACHE-II does not need scoring for intra-operative findings and histopathology reports, APACHE-II can be used pre-operatively to assess the risk in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. However, for audit purposes, either of the two scoring systems can be used.

Application of the APACHE II score to assess the condition of patients with critical neurological diseases

The Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) scoring system has been commonly used to assess the severity of patients' diseases in general intensive care units (ICUs). However, few studies have investigated the application of this scoring system in patients in neurologic ICUs. In this study, the APACHE II scores of 102 patients in the neurologic ICU were calculated within the first 24 h. The actual mortality and predicted mortality were obtained based on these scores and analyzed statistically. The data indicated that cerebral hemorrhage, cerebral infarction and intracranial infection accounted for the top three causes for admission to the neurologic ICU, and these conditions were associated with high APACHE II scores and high predicted mortality. Additionally, the actual mortality rate was lower than the predicted rate after effective treatment. All patients were divided into groups according to their APACHE II scores, and we found that higher APACHE II scores were associated with higher actual mortality, especially for patients whose APACHE II scores were greater than 10. The APACHE II scores of the deceased patient group were higher than those of the surviving group, and this difference was statistically significant. In conclusion, our study found that the APACHE II scoring system may provide valuable information for predicting patient's condition and prognosis in neurologic ICUs.

Comparison of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II and Glasgow Coma Score in predicting the outcomes of Post Anesthesia Care Unit's patients

Context:

Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) is one of the most general classification systems of disease severity in Intensive Care Units and Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) is one of the most specific ones.

Aims:

The aim of the current study was to assess APACHE II and GCS ability in predicting the outcomes (survivors, non-survivors) in the Post Anesthesia Care Unit's (PACU).

Settings and Design:

This was an observational and prospective study of 150 consecutive patients admitted in the PACU during 6-month period.

Materials and Methods:

Demographic information recorded on a checklist, also information about severity of disease calculated based on APACHE II scoring system in the first admission 24 h and GCS scale.

Statistical Analysis Used:

Logistic regression, Hosmer-Lemeshow test and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were used in statistical analysis (95% confidence interval).

Results:

Data analysis showed a significant statistical difference between outcomes and both APACHE II and Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) (P < 0.0001). The ROC-curve analysis suggested that the predictive ability of GCS is slightly better than APACHE II in this study. For GCS the area under the ROC curve was 86.1% (standard error [SE]: 3.8%), and for APACHE II it was 85.7% (SE: 3.5%), also the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic revealed better calibration for GCS (χ² = 5.177, P = 0.521), than APACHE II (χ² = 10.203, P = 0.251).

Conclusions:

The survivors had significantly lower APACHE II and higher GCS compared with non-survivors, also GCS showed more predictive accuracy than APACHE II in prognosticating the outcomes in PACU.

Comparison of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation IV to predict intensive care unit mortality

Context:

Clinical assessment of severity of illness is an essential component of medical practice to predict the outcome of critically ill-patient. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) model is one of the widely used scoring systems.

Aims:

This study was designed to evaluate the Performance of APACHE II and IV scoring systems in our Intensive Care Unit (ICU).

Settings and Design:

A prospective study in 6 bedded ICU, including 76 patients all above 15 years.

Subjects and Methods:

APACHE II and APACHE IV scores were calculated based on the worst values in the first 24 h of admission. All enrolled patients were followed, and outcome was recorded as survivors or nonsurvivors.

Statistical Analysis Used:

SPSS version 17.

Results:

The mean APACHE score was significantly higher among nonsurvivors than survivors (P < 0.005). Discrimination for APACHE II and APACHE IV was fair with area under receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.73 and 0.79 respectively. The cut-off point with best Youden index for APACHE II was 17 and for APACHE IV was 85. Above cut-off point, mortality was higher for both models (P < 0.005). Hosmer–Lemeshow Chi-square coefficient test showed better calibration for APACHE II than APACHE IV. A positive correlation was seen between the models with Spearman's correlation coefficient of 0.748 (P < 0.01).

Conclusions:

Discrimination was better for APACHE IV than APACHE II model however Calibration was better for APACHE II than APACHE IV model in our study. There was good correlation between the two models observed in our study.

Applicability of different scoring systems in outcome prediction of patients with mixed drug poisoning-induced coma

Background:

Mixed drugs poisoning (MDP) is common in the emergency departments. Because of the limited number of intensive care unit beds, recognition of risk factors to divide the patients into different survival groups is necessary. Poisoning due to ingestion of different medications may have additive or antagonistic effects on different parameters included in the scoring systems; therefore, the aim of the study was to compare applicability of the different scoring systems in outcomes prediction of patients admitted with MDP-induced coma.

Methods:

This prospective, observational study included 93 patients with MDP-induced coma. Clinical and laboratory data conforming to the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II), Modified APACHE II Score (MAS), Mainz Emergency Evaluation Scores (MEES) and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) were recorded for all patients on admission (time₀) and 24 h later (time₂₄). The outcome was recorded in two categories: Survived with or without complication and non-survived. Discrimination was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the ROC curve (AUC).

Results:

The mortality rate was 9.7%. Mean of each scoring system was statistically significant between time₀ and time₂₄ in the survivors. However, it was not significant in non-survivors. Discrimination was excellent for GCS₂₄ (0.90±0.05), APACHE II₂₄ (0.89±0.01), MAS₂₄ (0.86±0.10), and APACHE II₀ (0.83±0.11) AUC.

Conclusion:

The GCS₂₄, APACHE II₂₄, MAS₂₄, and APACHE II₀ scoring systems seem to predict the outcome in comatose patients due to MDP more accurately. GCS and MAS may have superiority over the others in being easy to perform and not requiring laboratory data.