Critical Care Nurses Inadequately Assess SAPS II Scores of Very Ill Patients in Real Life

• Published in: Critical Care Research and Practice Vol. 2012; no. 2012; pp. 668 - 676
• Main Authors: Perren, Andreas, Previsdomini, Marco, Perren, Ilaria, Merlani, Paolo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cairo, Egypt Hindawi Limiteds 01.01.2012; Hindawi Puplishing Corporation; Hindawi Publishing Corporation; Wiley
• ISSN: 2090-1305; 2090-1313
• DOI: 10.1155/2012/919106

Background. Reliable ICU severity scores have been achieved by various healthcare workers but nothing is known regarding the accuracy in real life of severity scores registered by untrained nurses. Methods. In this retrospective multicentre audit, three reviewers independently reassessed 120 SAPS II scores. Correlation and agreement of the sum-scores/variables among reviewers and between nurses and the reviewers’ gold standard were assessed globally and for tertiles. Bland and Altman (gold standard—nurses) of sum scores and regression of the difference were determined. A logistic regression model identifying risk factors for erroneous assessments was calculated. Results. Correlation for sum scores among reviewers was almost perfect (mean ICC = 0.985). The mean (±SD) nurse-registered SAPS II sum score was 40.3±20.2 versus 44.2±24.9 of the gold standard (P<0.002 for difference) with a lower ICC (0.81). Bland and Altman assay was +3.8±27.0 with a significant regression between the difference and the gold standard, indicating overall an overestimation (underestimation) of lower (higher; >32 points) scores. The lowest agreement was found in high SAPS II tertiles for haemodynamics (k = 0.45–0.51). Conclusions. In real life, nurse-registered SAPS II scores of very ill patients are inaccurate. Accuracy of scores was not associated with nurses’ characteristics.