Skip to main content
  • 3455 Accesses

Abstract

At the heart of optimal clinical medicine is the ability to prognosticate. Understanding a patient’s likely outcome, and how that outcome might change depending on alternative interventions, is essential if care is to be optimized. Perhaps nowhere is this issue both more important and more difficult than in intensive care. The ICU is home to a wide array of expensive technologies that can both help and harm the critically ill patient; ICU patients often have multiple complex conditions that make prognostication difficult, and decisions must be made rapidly and courageously, as time is of the essence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference

Related references

  1. Apgar V. The newborn (Apgar) scoring system. Reflections and advice. Pediatr Clin North Am 1966; 13: 645–650.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chamberlain G, Banks J. Assessment of the Apgar score. Lancet 1974; 2: 1225–1228.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Weinberger B, Anwar M, Hegyi T, Hiatt M, Koons A, Paneth N. Antecedents and neonatal consequences of low Apgar scores in preterm newborns: a population study. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2000; 154: 294–300.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Reference

Related references

  1. Jennett B, Bond M. Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. Lancet 1975; 1: 480–484.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Teasdale G, Knill-Jones R, van der Sande J. Observer variability in assessing impaired consciousness and coma. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1978; 41: 603–610.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Reference

Related references

  1. Ranson JH. Diagnostic standards for acute pancreatitis. World J Surg 1997; 21: 136–142.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Puolakkainen P, Schroder T. New trends in the diagnosis and treatment of severe acute pancreatitis. Ann Med 1990; 22: 375–376.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. De Bernardinis M, Violi V, Roncoroni L, Boselli AS, Giunta A, Peracchia A. Discriminant power and information content of Ranson's prognostic signs in acute pancreatitis: a meta-analytic study. Crit Care Med 1999; 27: 2272–2283.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Reference

Related references

  1. Baue AE. Multiple, progressive, or sequential systems failure. A syndrome of the 1970s. Arch Surg 1975; 110: 779–781.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Zimmerman JE, Knaus WA, Wagner DP, Sun X, Hakim RB, Nystrom PO. A comparison of risks and outcomes for patients with organ system failure: 1982–1990. Crit Care Med 1996; 24: 1633–1641.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Reference

Related references

  1. Knaus WA, Zimmerman JE, Wagner DP, Draper EA, Lawrence DE. APACHE—acute physiology and chronic health evaluation: a physiologically based classification system. Crit Care Med 1981; 9: 591–597.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Knaus WA, Wagner DP, Draper EA et al. The APACHE III prognostic system. Risk prediction of hospital mortality for critically ill hospitalized adults. Chest 1991; 100: 1619– 1636.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Reference

Related references

  1. Pollack MM, Patel KM, Ruttimann UE. PRISM III: an updated Pediatric Risk of Mortality score. Crit Care Med 1996; 24: 743–752.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Reference

Related references

  1. Cullen DJ, Civetta JM, Briggs BA, Ferrara LC. Therapeutic intervention scoring system: a method for quantitative comparison of patient care. Crit Care Med 1974; 2: 57–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cullen DJ, Nemeskal AR, Zaslavsky AM. Intermediate TISS: a new Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System for non-ICU patients. Crit Care Med 1994; 22: 1406–1411.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Miranda DR, de Rijk A, Schaufeli W. Simplified Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System: the TISS-28 items—results from a multicenter study. Crit Care Med 1996; 24: 64–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Reference

Related references

  1. Lemeshow S, Teres D, Pastides H, Avrunin JS, Steingrub JS. A method for predicting survival and mortality of ICU patients using objectively derived weights. Crit Care Med 1985; 13: 519–525.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Le Gall JR, Lemeshow S, Saulnier F. A new Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study. JAMA 1993; 270: 2957–2963.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Reference

Related references

  1. Landon B, Iezzoni LI, Ash AS et al. Judging hospitals by severity-adjusted mortality rates: the case of CABG surgery. Inquiry 1996; 33: 155–166.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tu JV, Naylor CD. Coronary artery bypass mortality rates in Ontario. A Canadian approach to quality assurance in cardiac surgery. Steering Committee of the Provincial Adult Cardiac Care Network of Ontario. Circulation 1996; 94: 2429–2433.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sirio CA, Shepardson LB, Rotondi AJ et al. Community-wide assessment of intensive care outcomes using a physiologically based prognostic measure: implications for critical care delivery from Cleveland Health Quality Choice. Chest 1999; 115: 793–801.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Reference

Related references

  1. Knaus WA, Harrell FE Jr, Lynn J et al. The SUPPORT prognostic model. Objective estimates of survival for seriously ill hospitalized adults. Study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatments. Ann Intern Med 1995; 122: 191–203.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Angus, D.C. (2008). Scoring systems. In: Fink, M., Hayes, M., Soni, N. (eds) Classic Papers in Critical Care. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-145-9_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-145-9_18

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84882-005-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84800-145-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics