This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Leteurtre, S. Articles by Leclerc, F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Leteurtre, S. Articles by Leclerc, F. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Development of a Pediatric Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score

Use of Two Strategies

Alain Martinot, MD

Alain Duhamel, PhD

France Gauvin, MD

Bruno Grandbastien, MD

Thi Vu Nam, MD

François Proulx, MD

Jacques Lacroix, MD

Francis Leclerc, MD

Background. An organ dysfunction (OD) scoring system for critically ill children is not yet available, and the method for developing such a system is not well defined. The aim of this study was to compare two developmental methods for assessing OD in critically ill children. Methods. Consecutive admissions between January and May 1997 in three French and Canadian pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) were studied prospectively. Physiologic data were selected using a Delphi method; the most ab normal values during PICU stay were recorded. The outcome measure was the vital status at PICU discharge. Six organ systems were studied: hepatic, cardiovascular, renal, hematologic, respiratory, and neurologic. For each of the six organ systems, the PEdiatric Multiple OD (PEMOD) system included one variable and the PEdiatric Lo gistic OD (PELOD) system included several variables. Severity levels and relative weights of ODs were determined according to the mortality rate (PEMOD) or by logistic regression (PELOD). Results. There were 594 admissions, including 51 deaths (9%). Severity levels and relative weights of ODs were: four levels graded from 1 to 4 for the PEMOD system and three levels with scores of 1, 10, and 20 for PELOD system. For both systems, calibrations were good (p = 0.23 and p = 0.44 respectively). The PELOD system was more discriminant than the PEMOD system (areas under the ROC curves 0.98 and 0.92, respectively, p < 10 ^-5). Moreover, with the PEMOD system, four ODs did not contribute significantly to the prediction of PICU outcome. Conclusions. The PELOD system was more discriminant and had the advantage of taking into ac count both the relative severities among ODs and the degree of severity of each OD. Key words: intensive care unit; multiple organ failure; outcome measure; patient out come assessment; pediatric severity of illness index. (Med Decis Making 1999;19: 399-410)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 19, No. 4, 399-410 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9901900408


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Carcillo, R. Holubkov, J. M. Dean, J. Berger, K. L. Meert, K. J. S. Anand, J. Zimmerman, C. J. L. Newth, R. Harrison, D. F. Willson, et al. Rationale and Design of the Pediatric Critical Illness Stress-Induced Immune Suppression (CRISIS) Prevention Trial JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr, July 1, 2009; 33(4): 368 - 374. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. P. Marcin and M. M. Pollack Review of the Acuity Scoring Systems for the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit and Their Use in Quality Improvement J Intensive Care Med, May 1, 2007; 22(3): 131 - 140. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. Leclerc, S. Leteurtre, A. Duhamel, B. Grandbastien, F. Proulx, A. Martinot, F. Gauvin, P. Hubert, and J. Lacroix Cumulative Influence of Organ Dysfunctions and Septic State on Mortality of Critically Ill Children Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., February 15, 2005; 171(4): 348 - 353. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. M. Haley, R. J. Graham, and H. M. Dumas Outcome Rating Scales for Pediatric Head Injury J Intensive Care Med, July 1, 2004; 19(4): 205 - 219. [Abstract] [PDF]