{"title":"重症监护病房中APACHEⅱ评分自动计算系统的准确性和效率。","authors":"V J Gooder, B R Farr, M P Young","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We evaluated the reliability and efficiency of an automated system for calculating APACHE II scores. We imported an automated APACHE II scoring system developed at another institution. We scored a convenience sample of 50 consecutive intensive care unit (ICU) admissions using three methods: (1) the automated system (2) an expert scorer using a manual data abstraction method, and (3) the current manual scoring method used in the ICU. We analyzed interrater reliability among the three groups, and compared scoring time between the automated and the expert groups. Interrater reliability testing demonstrated a very high agreement between the computer and the expert scorers, (r = 0.97 p < 0.01) and a high agreement between the computer and the nursing staff (r = 0.80, p < 0.01). The mean time required to complete the data sheet manually and input data into a standalone computer manually was 4 minutes and 55 seconds, compared to total mean time of 33 seconds for the automated system. Automated APACHE II scoring yielded results more reliable than those of an expert scorer, as judged by a second researcher. The time required to score patients was reduced and reliability of scores was improved with use of an automated APACHE II scoring system.</p>","PeriodicalId":79455,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings : a conference of the American Medical Informatics Association. AMIA Fall Symposium","volume":" ","pages":"131-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2233464/pdf/procamiaafs00001-0170.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy and efficiency of an automated system for calculating APACHE II scores in an intensive care unit.\",\"authors\":\"V J Gooder, B R Farr, M P Young\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We evaluated the reliability and efficiency of an automated system for calculating APACHE II scores. We imported an automated APACHE II scoring system developed at another institution. We scored a convenience sample of 50 consecutive intensive care unit (ICU) admissions using three methods: (1) the automated system (2) an expert scorer using a manual data abstraction method, and (3) the current manual scoring method used in the ICU. We analyzed interrater reliability among the three groups, and compared scoring time between the automated and the expert groups. Interrater reliability testing demonstrated a very high agreement between the computer and the expert scorers, (r = 0.97 p < 0.01) and a high agreement between the computer and the nursing staff (r = 0.80, p < 0.01). The mean time required to complete the data sheet manually and input data into a standalone computer manually was 4 minutes and 55 seconds, compared to total mean time of 33 seconds for the automated system. Automated APACHE II scoring yielded results more reliable than those of an expert scorer, as judged by a second researcher. The time required to score patients was reduced and reliability of scores was improved with use of an automated APACHE II scoring system.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings : a conference of the American Medical Informatics Association. AMIA Fall Symposium\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"131-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2233464/pdf/procamiaafs00001-0170.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings : a conference of the American Medical Informatics Association. AMIA Fall Symposium\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings : a conference of the American Medical Informatics Association. AMIA Fall Symposium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
我们评估了计算APACHE II评分的自动化系统的可靠性和效率。我们引进了另一个机构开发的自动化APACHE II评分系统。我们使用三种方法对50个连续入住重症监护病房(ICU)的方便样本进行评分:(1)自动化系统;(2)使用手动数据抽象方法的专家评分;(3)目前在ICU使用的手动评分方法。我们分析了三组之间的互判员信度,并比较了自动化组和专家组的评分时间。量表间信度检验表明,计算机与专家评分者之间的一致性非常高(r = 0.97 p < 0.01),计算机与护理人员之间的一致性非常高(r = 0.80, p < 0.01)。手动完成数据表并手动将数据输入到独立计算机所需的平均时间为4分55秒,而自动化系统的总平均时间为33秒。自动APACHE II评分产生的结果比专家评分者的结果更可靠,由第二位研究人员判断。使用自动化APACHE II评分系统减少了患者评分所需的时间,提高了评分的可靠性。
Accuracy and efficiency of an automated system for calculating APACHE II scores in an intensive care unit.
We evaluated the reliability and efficiency of an automated system for calculating APACHE II scores. We imported an automated APACHE II scoring system developed at another institution. We scored a convenience sample of 50 consecutive intensive care unit (ICU) admissions using three methods: (1) the automated system (2) an expert scorer using a manual data abstraction method, and (3) the current manual scoring method used in the ICU. We analyzed interrater reliability among the three groups, and compared scoring time between the automated and the expert groups. Interrater reliability testing demonstrated a very high agreement between the computer and the expert scorers, (r = 0.97 p < 0.01) and a high agreement between the computer and the nursing staff (r = 0.80, p < 0.01). The mean time required to complete the data sheet manually and input data into a standalone computer manually was 4 minutes and 55 seconds, compared to total mean time of 33 seconds for the automated system. Automated APACHE II scoring yielded results more reliable than those of an expert scorer, as judged by a second researcher. The time required to score patients was reduced and reliability of scores was improved with use of an automated APACHE II scoring system.