We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Article |

Comparison of APACHE II and III Scoring Systems for Mortality Prediction in Critical Surgical Illness

Philip S. Barie, MD, FCCM; Lynn J. Hydo; Eva Fischer, MD
Arch Surg. 1995;130(1):77-82. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1995.01430010079016.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


Objective:  To determine whether the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III (APACHE III), an updated version of APACHE II that contains a larger number of postoperative patients in the normative database, offers better prediction in critical surgical illness.

Design:  Prospective cohort study.

Setting:  Surgical intensive care unit of an urban, tertiary-care university hospital.

Participants:  Eight hundred forty-four consecutive patients in the surgical intensive care unit. Overall scores were determined, as well as scores for survivor, nonsurvivor, trauma, nontrauma, postoperative, and nonoperative patient subgroups.

Main Outcome Measures:  Survival to hospital discharge, and survival compared with published normative APACHE II and III databases.

Results:  Mean age was 65.1 ±0.5 years. Overall mortality was 7.0% in the surgical intensive care unit and 9.1% in the hospital. The relationship between APACHE II and APACHE III scores for individual patients was linear and correlated significantly (P<.0001) (range of correlation coefficients,.72 to.86) overall and in all subgroups. Both scoring systems overestimated our mortality, but estimations made by APACHE III were significantly (P<.01) higher overall and in all subgroups.

Conclusions:  In institutions or groups of patients where APACHE II underestimates mortality, APACHE III may be corrective. However, the differences are subtle and may be difficult to detect in smaller studies.(Arch Surg. 1995;130:77-82)


Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?





Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.