Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/34404
Title: Validation of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and IV Score in COVID-19 Patients
Authors: VANDENBRANDE, Jeroen 
Verbrugge, Laurens
BRUCKERS, Liesbeth 
Geebelen, Laurien
Geerts, Ester
CALLEBAUT, Ina 
Gruyters, Ine
Heremans, Liesbeth
Dubois, Jasperina
STESSEL, Bjorn 
Editors: Bittner, Edward A
Issue Date: 2021
Publisher: HINDAWI LTD
Source: Critical Care Research and Practice, 2021 (Art N° 5443083)
Abstract: Background. Severity scoring systems are inherent to ICU practice for multiple purposes. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) scoring systems are designed for ICU mortality prediction. *is study aims to validate APACHE IV in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. Methods. All COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between March 13, 2020, and October 17, 2020, were retrospectively analyzed. APACHE II and APACHE IV scores as well as SOFA scores were calculated within 24 hours after admission. Discrimination for mortality of all three scoring systems was assessed by receiver operating characteristic curves. Youden index was determined for the scoring system with the best discriminative performance. *e Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was used to assess calibration. All analyses were performed for both the overall population as in a subgroup treated with anti-Xa adjusted dosages of LMWHs. Results. 116 patients were admitted to our ICU during the study period. 13 were excluded for various reasons, leaving 103 patients in the statistical analysis of the overall population. 57 patients were treated with anti-Xa adjusted prophylactic dosages of LMWH and were supplementary analyzed in a subgroup analysis. APACHE IV had the best discriminative power of the three scoring systems, both in the overall population (APACHE IV ROC AUC 0.67 vs. APACHE II ROC AUC 0.63) as in the subgroup (APACHE IV ROC AUC 0.82 vs. APACHE II ROC AUC 0.7). *is model exhibits good calibration. Hosmer–Lemeshow p values for APACHE IV were 0.9234 for the overall population and 0.8017 for the subgroup. Calibration p values of the APACHE II score were 0.1394 and 0.6475 for the overall versus subgroup, respectively. Conclusions. APACHE IV provided the best discrimination and calibration of the considered scoring systems in critically ill COVID-19 patients, both in the overall group and in the subgroup with anti-Xa adjusted LMWH doses. Only in the subgroup analysis, discriminative abilities of APACHE IV were very good. *is trial is registered with NCT04713852.
Document URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/34404
ISSN: 2090-1305
e-ISSN: 2090-1313
DOI: 10.1155/2021/5443083
ISI #: 000671848700001
Rights: 2021 Jeroen Vandenbrande et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Category: A1
Type: Journal Contribution
Appears in Collections:Research publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
5443083.pdfPublished version1.55 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

16
checked on Apr 22, 2024

Page view(s)

36
checked on Aug 10, 2022

Download(s)

12
checked on Aug 10, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.