Intensive care unit scoring systems outperform emergency department scoring systems for mortality prediction in critically ill patients: a prospective cohort study

Table 1 A comparison of the variables included in different scoring systems

Patient variable	REMS	MEWS	Seymour	PEDS	SAPS II	APACHE II	APACHE III
Temperature	x	x			x	x	x
Respiratory rate	x	x	x			x	x
Mean arterial pressure	x					x	x
Systolic blood pressure		x	x	x	x
Heart rate	x	x	x		x	x	x
Pulse oximetry (%)	x		x
Glasgow coma scale total	x		x	x	x	x	x
GCS visual		x					x
GCS motor		x					x
GCS speech		x					x
Age	x		x		x	x	x
Chronic disease and elective postop						x	x
Chronic disease and emerg postop						x	x
Chronic disease and nonoperative						x	x
Metastatic cancer				x	x		x
Hematologic malignancy^a					x		x
Immunosuppressed						x	x
AIDS					x		x
Hepatic failure or cirrhosis^a							x
Medical admission					x
Unscheduled surgery					x
Serum glucose				x			x
Serum bicarbonate				x	x
WBC				x	x	x	x
Hematocrit						x	x
Urine output in 24 h					x		x
Serum Cr						x	x
Serum BUN					x		x
Serum potassium					x	x	x
Serum sodium					x	x	x
Serum bilirubin					x		x
PaO2/FiO2					x	x	x
A-a gradient						x	x
pH on ABG						x	x
pCO2 on ABG							x
Acute renal failure						x	x

^aAPACHE III separates ‘Leukemia and multiple myeloma’ from lymphoma and also awards different points to ‘Hepatic failure’ and cirrhosis.

ISSN: 2052-0492