J Pediatr Intensive Care 2018; 07(04): 201-206
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1673671
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Comparison of Pediatric Risk of Mortality III, Pediatric Index of Mortality 2, and Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 in Predicting Mortality in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

Priyamvada Tyagi
1   Department of Pediatrics, Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College and King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
,
Milind S. Tullu
1   Department of Pediatrics, Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College and King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
,
Mukesh Agrawal
1   Department of Pediatrics, Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College and King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
› Author Affiliations
Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Further Information

Publication History

24 February 2018

11 May 2018

Publication Date:
11 October 2018 (online)

Zoom Image

Abstract

Aims To compare and validate the Pediatric Risk of Mortality (PRISM) III, Pediatric Index of Mortality (PIM) 2, and PIM 3 scores in a tertiary care pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) (Indian setting).

Materials and Methods All consecutively admitted patients in the PICU of a public hospital (excluding those with unstable vital signs or cardiopulmonary resuscitation within 2 hours of admission, cardiopulmonary resuscitation before admission, and discharge or death in less than 24 hours after admission) were included. PRISM III, PIM 2, and PIM 3 scores were calculated. Mortality discrimination for the three scores was calculated using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and calibration was performed using the Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test.

Results A total of 350 patients were included (male:female = 1.3:1) over the study duration of 18 months (median age: 12 months [interquartile range: 4–60 months]). Nearly half were infants (47.4%). Patients with central nervous system disease were the highest (22.8%) followed by cardiovascular system (20.6%). Mortality rate was 39.4% (138 deaths). The area under the ROC curve for the PRISM III score was 0.667, and goodness-of-fit test showed no significant difference between the observed and expected mortalities in any of these categories (p > 0.5), showing good calibration. Areas under the ROC curve for the PIM 2 and PIM 3 scores were 0.728 and 0.726, respectively. For both the scores, the goodness-of-fit test showed good calibration.

Conclusions Although all the three scores demonstrate good calibration, the PIM 2 and PIM 3 scores have an advantage regarding the better discrimination ability, ease of data collection, simplicity of computation, and inherent capacity of not being affected by treatment in PICU.

Author Contributions

Dr. Priyamvada Tyagi was involved in the conceptualization of the manuscript, collecting patient data, conducting literature search, and drafting the manuscript. Dr. Milind S. Tullu and Dr. Mukesh Agrawal were involved in the conceptualization of the manuscript, supervising the data collection, conducting literature search, and revising the manuscript. Dr. Milind S. Tullu acted as the guarantor of the manuscript.