Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Fachübergreifende Aspekte der Hämostaseologie V pp 41–55Cite as

Scoresysteme bei Sepsis und ihre Wertigkeit für die Stratifizierung von Patienten mit Gerinnungsstörungen und Sepsis

  • Conference paper

  • 27 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

In verschiedenen Bereichen der Medizin werden Scoresysteme seit längerem zur quantitativen Erfassung von Befunden eingesetzt. So dient z. B. der Apgar-Score der Beurteilung der Vitalität des Neugeborenen, der Glasgow-Coma-Score wird zur Abschätzung des Schweregrades einer Bewusstlosigkeit herangezogen.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Angus DC (1998) Discourse on method: Measuring the value of new therapies in intensive care. In: Vincent JL (ed) Yearbook of intensive care and emergency medicine. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, p 263–79.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Angus DC, Schmitz RJ (2000) Current and projected workforce requirements for care of the critically ill and patients with pulmonary disease — Can we meet the requirements of an aging population? JAMA 284: 2762–2770

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bastos PG, Sun X, Wagner DP, Knaus WA, Zimmermann JE (1996) Application of the APACHE III prognostic system in Brazilian intensive care units: A prospective multi-center study. Intensive Care Med 22 (6): 564–570

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Carlet J, Montuclard L, Garrouste-Oregas M (2001) Disaggregating data: From groups to individuals. In: Sibbald WJ (ed) Evaluating critical care. Update in intensive care and emergency medicine, vol 35. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, p 309–320

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cohen J, Guyatt G, Bernard GR et al. (2001) New strategies for clinical trials in patients with sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med 29 (4): 880–885

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dragstedt L, Jorgensen J, Jensen NH (1989) Interhospital comparisons of patients outcome from intensive care: Importance of lead time bias. Crit Care Med 17: 418–422

    Google Scholar 

  7. Escare JJ, Kelley MA (1990) Admission source to the medical intensive care unit predicts hospital death independent of the APACHE II score. JAMA 264: 2389–2394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fery-Lemonnier E, Landais P, Loirat P, Kleinknecht D, Brivet F (1995) Evaluation of severity scoring systems in ICUs-translation, conversion and definition ambiguities as a source of inter-observer variability in Apache II, SAPS and OSF. Intensive Care Med 21 (4): 356–360

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Friedland JS, Porter JC, Daryanani S et al. (1996) Plasma proinflammatory cytokine concentrations, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III scores and survival in patients in an intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 24 (11): 1775–1781

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hadorn DC, Keeler EB, Rogers WH (1993) Assessing the performance of mortality prediction models. Rand, Santa Monica

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hosmer DJ, Lemeshow S (1989) Model-building strategies and methods for logistic regression. In: Hosmer DJ, Lemeshow S (eds) Applied logistic regression. John Wiley & Sons, New York, p 82–134

    Google Scholar 

  12. Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP (1989) The development of APACHE III, Crit Care Med 17 (Suppl 12): 169–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Knaus WA, Harreil FE, Fisher CJ Jr et al. (1993) The clinical evaluation of new drugs for sepsis. A prospective study design based on survival analysis. JAMA 270 (10): 1233–1241

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Knaus WA, Sun X, Nystrom PO, Wagner DP (1992) Evaluation of definitions for sepsis. Chest 101 (6): 1656–1662

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Knaus WA, Wagner DP, Draper EA et al. (1991) The APACHE III prognostic system. Risk prediction of hospital mortality for critically ill hospitalized adults. Chest 100 (6): 1619–1636

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Knaus WA, Wagner DP, Zimmermann JE, Draper EA (1993) Variations in mortality and length of stay in intensive care units. Ann Intern Med 118 (10): 753–761

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Lamb FJ, Rhodes A, Bennett ED (1997) Can intensive care units be compared? In: Vincent JL (ed) Yearbook of intensive care and emergency medicine. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, p 896–905

    Google Scholar 

  18. Le Gall JR, Lemeshow S, Leleu G et al. (1995) Customized probability models for early severe sepsis in adult intensive care patients. JAMA 273 (8): 644–650

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lemeshow S (1988) Refining intensive care unit outcome prediction by using changing probablities of mortality. Crit Care Med 16 (5): 470–477

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Markgraf R, Deutschinoff G, Pientka L, Scholten T (2000) Comparison of acute physiology and chronic health evaluations II and III and simplified acute physiology score II: A prospective cohort study evaluating these methods to predict outcome in a German interdisciplinary intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 28 (1): 26–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Markgraf R, Deutschinoff G, Pientka L, Scholten T, Lorenz C (2001) Performance of the score systems Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation. Crit Care 5 (1): 31–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. McLauchlan GH, Anderson ID, Grant IS, Pearson KCH (1995) Outcome of patients with abdominal sepsis treated in an intensive care unit. Br J Surg 82: 524–529

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Metz CE (1978) Basic principles of ROC analysis. Sem Nuc Med 8 (4): 283–298

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Moreno R, Apolone G (1997) Impact of different customization strategies in the performance of a general severity score. Crit Care Med 25 (12): 2001–2008

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Moreno R, Apolone G, Miranda DR (1998) Evaluation of the uniformity of fit of general outcome prediction models. Intensive Care Med 24: 40–47

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Perl TM, Dvorak L, Hwang T, Wenzel RP (1995) Longterm survival and function after suspected Gram-negative sepsis. JAMA 274: 338–345

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Pilz G, Werdan K (1989) Scoresysteme in der Intensivmedizin. Internist 30: 82–87

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Quartin AA, Roland MH, Kett DH, Peduzzi PN (for the Department of Veterans Affairs Systemic Sepsis Cooperative Study Group) (1997) Magnitude and duration of the effect of sepsis on survival. JAMA 277: 1058–1063

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Rapoport J, Teres D, Lemeshow S, Gehlbach S (1994) A method for assessing the clinical performance and cost-effectiveness of intensive care units: A multicenter inception cohort study. Crit Care Med 22 (9): 1385–1391

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Rivera-Fernández R, Vázquez-Mata G, Bravo M, Zimmermann JE, Wagner D, Knaus W (1998) The APACHE III prognostic system: Customized mortality predictions for Spanish ICU patients. Intensive Care Med 24: 574–581

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rowan KM, Kerr JH, Major E, McPherson K, Short A, Vessey MP (1993) Intensive Care Society’s APACHE II study in Britain and Ireland — II: Outcome comparisons of intensive care units after adjustment for case mix by the American APACHE II method. BMJ 307: 977–981

    Google Scholar 

  32. Rowan KM, Major E, McPherson K, Short A, Vessey MP (1993) Intensive Care Society’s APACHE II study in Britain and Ireland — I: Variations in case mix of adult admissions to general intensive care units and impact on outcome. BMJ 307: 972–977

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rue M (1997) Statistical issues related to applying severity models. Curr Op Crit Care 3: 175–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Schuster HP (1988) Hypothese: Score-Systeme optimieren die Intensivmedizin. Med Klin 83 (2): 68–72

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Silva AM, Nap RE, Miranda DR (1999) Monitoring adverse events in the ICU and patient outcome. Intensive Care Med 25 (S1): S46

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sirio CA, Rotondi AJ (1999) Community-wide assessment of intensive care outcomes using a physiologically based prognostic measure: Implications for critical care delivery from Cleveland health quality choice. Chest 115 (3): 793–801

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Suistomaa M Ruokonen E (2000) Sampling rate causes bias in APACHE II and SAPS II scores. Intensive Care Med 26 (12): 1727–1729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Zimmermann JE, Draper EA, Wagner DP (2001) Comparing ICU populations: Background and current methods. In: Sibbald WJ, Bion JF (eds) Evaluating critical care. Update in intensive care and emergency medicine, vol 35. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, p 121–139

    Google Scholar 

  39. Zimmermann JE, Wagner DP, Draper EA, Wright L, Alzola C, Knaus WA (1998) Evaluation of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation III predictions of hospital mortality in an independent database. Crit Care Med 26 (8): 1317–1326

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. G. Deutschinoff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. Friedrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Markgraf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. T. Scholten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Anästhesiologie, Universität Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland

    Eike Martin

  2. Medizinische Klinik I, Universität Heidelberg, Bergheimer Straße 58, 69115, Heidelberg, Deutschland

    Peter Nawroth

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Deutschinoff, G., Friedrich, C., Markgraf, R., Scholten, T. (2002). Scoresysteme bei Sepsis und ihre Wertigkeit für die Stratifizierung von Patienten mit Gerinnungsstörungen und Sepsis. In: Martin, E., Nawroth, P. (eds) Fachübergreifende Aspekte der Hämostaseologie V. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-93394-3_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-93394-3_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43350-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-93394-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation