Case mix, outcomes and comparison of risk prediction models for admissions to adult, general and specialist critical care units for head injury: a secondary analysis of the ICNARC Case Mix Programme Database

Jonathan A Hyam¹, Catherine A Welch² , David A Harrison² and David K Menon³

¹Department of Neurosurgery, Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK

²Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC), Tavistock House, Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9HR, UK

³University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, UK

author email corresponding author email

Critical Care 2006, 10(Suppl 2):S2doi:10.1186/cc5066


Published:	12 October 2006

Abstract

Introduction

This report describes the case mix and outcome (mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay) for admissions to ICU for head injury and evaluates the predictive ability of five risk adjustment models.

Methods

A secondary analysis was conducted of data from the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) Case Mix Programme, a high quality clinical database, of 374,594 admissions to 171 adult critical care units across England, Wales and Northern Ireland from 1995 to 2005. The discrimination and calibration of five risk prediction models, SAPS II, MPM II, APACHE II and III and the ICNARC model plus raw Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) were compared.

Results

There were 11,021 admissions following traumatic brain injury identified (3% of all database admissions). Mortality in ICU was 23.5% and in-hospital was 33.5%. Median ICU and hospital lengths of stay were 3.2 and 24 days, respectively, for survivors and 1.6 and 3 days, respectively, for non-survivors. The ICNARC model, SAPS II and MPM II discriminated best between survivors and non-survivors and were better calibrated than raw GCS, APACHE II and III in 5,393 patients eligible for all models.

Conclusion

Traumatic brain injury requiring intensive care has a high mortality rate. Non-survivors have a short length of ICU and hospital stay. APACHE II and III have poorer calibration and discrimination than SAPS II, MPM II and the ICNARC model in traumatic brain injury; however, no model had perfect calibration.