Abstract

BACKGROUND
To determine the prognostic value of the initial APACHE II score in the ED compared with the classic APACHE II score in the ICU and to check the usefulness of the MEDS score together for more rapid risk stratification of septic patients admitted to the ICU via the ED.
METHODS
We prospectively checked the initial APACHE II and MEDS scores of all the patients who had systemic inflammatory response syndrome in the ED and the classic APACHE II scores after admission to the ICU, as well 6 months later. We enrolled the only sepsis cases in the final diagnosis after reviewing the medical records. We evaluated the predictive abilities of the initial APACHE II and MEDS scores compared with the classic APACHE II score.
RESULTS
During 6 months, 58 patients diagnosed with sepsis were enrolled. Twenty-four (41.4%) patients died within 28 days of admission and 34 patients survived. The mortality group had a significantly higher mean classic APACHE II score (19 +/- 6.7 vs. 15 +/- 5.0, p < 0.01) and a higher mean MEDS score (16.67 +/- 2.70 vs. 8.91 +/- 3.11, p < 0.01) than the survivor group. The initial APACHE II score at the ED was not significantly different between the two groups. ROC analysis showed the discriminative power of the MEDS score in predicting mortality was much better than the APACHE II score (areas under the curves of the APACHE II score in the ED and ICU, and the MEDS scores were 0.668, 0.807, and 0.967, respectively; p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
The initial APACHE II score in the ED did not predict mortality better than the classic APACHE II score. However, the MEDS score predicted the poor prognosis of septic patients more rapidly and accurately in the ED than the APACHE II model.

• Keywords: APACHE II score;mortality prediction;MEDS score;sepsis;