Dataset Information

Dynamic SOFA score assessments to predict outcomes after acute admission of octogenarians to the intensive care unit.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Identifying which octogenarians could benefit most from continuing critical care is challenging. We aimed to see if responses to therapies using the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score on day 4 after unplanned admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) could be associated with short-term mortality.

Methods

In this prospective observational cohort study, data from 4 ICUs in a University Hospital included SOFA scores on admission and day 4, along with preadmission measurements of frailty, comorbidities, nutritional status and number of medications. Outcome measures included mortality and loss of autonomy on day 90 after admission.

Results

Eighty-seven critically ill patients aged 80 years or older with preadmission functional independence and no missing SOFA score data on day 4 were studied (primary analyses). The mortality rate on day 90 was 30%. In a univariate Cox model, the SOFA score on day 4 was significantly associated with mortality rate: hazard ratio = 1.18 per one-point increase, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.08 to 1.28 (p<0.001). A SOFA score of 6 or more on day 4 could correctly classify 75% of patients who died on day 90, with a sensitivity of 54% and a specificity of 84%. After adjustment, the SOFA score on day 4, neurological failure on admission and the number of preadmission medications were significantly associated with mortality on day 90, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.91). These findings were confirmed in a sensitivity analysis with 109 patients. Preadmission frailty was the only variable independently associated with loss of autonomy in the 49 surviving patients.

Conclusion

Measuring SOFA score on day 4 and preadmission frailty could help predict mortality and loss of autonomy on day 90 in octogenarians after their acute admission to the ICU.

SUBMITTER: Loyrion E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8328283 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeThe final decision for discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU) is uncertain because it is made according to various patient parameters; however, it should be made on an objective evaluation. Previous reports have been inconsistent and unreliable in predicting post-ICU mortality. To identify predictive factors associated with post-ICU mortality, we analyzed physiological and laboratory data at ICU discharge.MethodsPatients admitted to our ICU between September 2012 and August 2013 and staying for critical care>2 days were included. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score; systemic inflammatory response syndrome score; white blood cell count; and serum C reactive protein, procalcitonin (PCT), interleukin-6 (IL-6), lactate, albumin, and hemoglobin levels were recorded. The primary end point was 90-day mortality after ICU discharge. Two hundred eighteen patients were enrolled (195 survivors, 23 non-survivors).ResultsNon-survivors presented a higher SOFA score and serum PCT, and IL-6 levels, as well as lower serum albumin and hemoglobin levels. Serum PCT, albumin, and SOFA score were associated with 90-day mortality in multiple logistic regression analysis. Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed chi-square value of 6.96, and P value of 0.54. The area under the curve (95% confidence interval) was 0.830 (0.771-0.890) for PCT, 0.688 (0.566-0.810) for albumin, 0.861 (0.796-0.927) for SOFA score, and increased to 0.913 (0.858-0.969) when these were combined. Serum PCT level at 0.57 ng/mL, serum albumin at 2.5 g/dL and SOFA score at 5.5 predict 90-day mortality, and high PCT, low albumin and high SOFA groups had significantly higher mortality. Serum PCT and SOFA score were significantly associated with survival days after ICU discharge in Cox regression analysis.ConclusionsSerum PCT level and SOFA score at ICU discharge predict post-ICU mortality and survival days after ICU discharge. The combination of these two and albumin level might enable accurate prediction.

Project description:ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate the accuracy of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score on different days in predicting the mortality of critically ill patients to identify the best time point for the APACHE II score.MethodsThe demographic and clinical data are retrieved from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-IV dataset. APACHE II scores on days 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 14, and 28 of hospitalization are calculated, and their performance is evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) analysis. The cut-off for defining the high risk of mortality is determined using Youden's index. The APACHE II score on day 3 is the best time point to predict hospital mortality of ICU patients. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test is then applied to evaluate the calibration of the day 3 APACHE II score.ResultsWe recruited 6,374 eligible subjects from the MIMIC-IV database. Day 3 is the optimal time point for obtaining the APACHE II score to predict the hospital mortality of patients. The best cut-off for day 3 APACHE II score is 17. When APACHE II score ≥17, the sensitivity for the non-survivors and survivors is 92.8 and 82.2%, respectively, and the positive predictive value (PPV) is 23.1%. When APACHE II socre <17, the specificity for non-survivors and survivors is 90.1 and 80.2%, respectively, and the negative predictive value (NPV) is 87.8%. When day-3 APACHE II is used to predict the hospital mortality, the AUROC is 0.743 (P <0.001). In the ≥17 group, the sensitivity of non-survivors and survivors is 92.2 and 81.3%, respectively, and the PPV is 30.3%. In the <17 group, the specificity of non-survivors and survivors is 100.0 and 80.2%, respectively, and the NPV is 81.6%. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test indicated day-3 APACHE II has a high predicting the hospital mortality (X 2 = 6.198, P = 0.625, consistency = 79.4%). However, the day-1 APACHE II has a poor calibration in predicting the hospital mortality rate (X 2 = 294.898, P <0.001).ConclusionDay-3 APACHE II score is an optimal biomarker to predict the outcomes of ICU patients; 17 is the best cut-off for defining patients at high risk of mortality.

Project description:Background and aimsRisk factors for poor outcomes after critical illness are incompletely understood. While nutritional risk is associated with mortality in critically ill patients, its association with disability, cognitive, and health-related quality of life is unclear in survivors of critical illness. This study's objective was to determine whether greater nutritional risk at ICU admission is associated with greater disability, worse cognition, and worse HRQOL at 3 and 12-month follow-up.MethodsWe enrolled adults (≥18 years of age) with respiratory failure or shock treated in medical and surgical intensive care units from two U.S. centers. We measured nutritional risk using the modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) score (range 0-9 [highest risk]) at intensive care unit admission. We measured associations between mNUTRIC scores and discharge destination, disability in basic activities of daily living (ADLs) using the Katz ADL, instrumental ADLs using the Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ), global cognition using the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), executive function using the Trail Making Test Part B (Trails B), and health-related quality of life using the SF-36, adjusting for sex, education, BMI, baseline frailty, disability, and cognition, severity of illness, days of delirium, coma, and mechanical ventilation.ResultsOf the 821 patients enrolled in the ICU, 636 patients survived to hospital discharge. We assessed outcomes in 448 of 535 survivors (84%) at 3 months and 382 of 476 survivors (80%) at 12 months. Higher mNUTRIC scores predicted greater odds of discharge to an institution (OR 2.0, 95% CI: 1.6 to 2.6; P < 0.01). Higher mNUTRIC scores were associated with a trend towards greater disability in basic activities of daily living (IRR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.7) at 3 months that did not reach significance (p = 0.09) with no association demonstrated at 12 months. There were no associations between mNUTRIC scores and FAQ, RBANS, or Trails B scores. mNUTRIC scores were inconsistently associated with SF-36 physical and mental component scale scores.ConclusionsGreater nutritional risk at ICU admission is associated with disability in survivors of critical illness. Future studies should evaluate interventions in those at high nutritional risk as a means to speed recovery.

Project description:ObjectivesPrognosis for patients with cirrhosis admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) is poor. ICU prognostic models are more accurate than liver-specific models. We identified predictors of mortality, developed a novel prognostic score (Royal Free Hospital (RFH) score), and tested it against established prognostic models and the yet unvalidated Chronic Liver Failure-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (CLIF-SOFA) model.MethodsPredictors of mortality were defined by logistic regression in a cohort of 635 consecutive patients with cirrhosis admitted to ICU (1989-2012). The RFH score was derived using a 75% training and 25% validation set. Predictive accuracy and calibration were evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) and goodness-of-fit χ(2) for the RFH score, as well as for SOFA, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II), and Child-Pugh. CLIF-SOFA was applied to a recent subset (2005-2012) of patients.ResultsIn-hospital mortality was 52.3%. Mortality improved over time but with a corresponding reduction in acuity of illness on admission. Predictors of mortality in training set, which constituted the RFH score, were the following: bilirubin, international normalized ratio, lactate, alveolar arterial partial pressure oxygen gradient, urea, while variceal bleeding as indication for admission conferred lesser risk. Classification accuracy was 73.4% in training and 76.7% in validation sample and did not change significantly across different eras of admission. The AUROC for the derived model was 0.83 and the goodness-of-fit χ(2) was 3.74 (P=0.88). AUROC for SOFA was 0.81, MELD was 0.79, APACHE II was 0.78, and Child-Pugh was 0.67. In 2005-2012 cohort, AUROC was: SOFA: 0.74, CLIF-SOFA: 0.75, and RFH: 0.78. Goodness-of-fit χ(2) was: SOFA: 6.21 (P=0.63), CLIF-SOFA: 9.18 (P=0.33), and RFH: 2.91 (P=0.94).ConclusionsRFH score demonstrated good discriminative ability and calibration. Internal validation supports its generalizability. CLIF-SOFA did not perform better than RFH and the original SOFA. External validation of our model should be undertaken to confirm its clinical utility.