The objective of this study was to refine the APACHE (Acute Physiology, Age, Chronic Health Evaluation) methodology in order to more accurately predict hospital mortality risk for critically ill hospitalized adults. We prospectively collected data on 17,440 unselected adult medical/surgical intensive care unit (ICU) admissions at 40 US hospitals (14 volunteer tertiary-care institutions and 26 hospitals randomly chosen to represent intensive care services nationwide). We analyzed the relationship between the patient's likelihood of surviving to hospital discharge and the following predictive variables: major medical and surgical disease categories, acute physiologic abnormalities, age, preexisting functional limitations, major comorbidities, and treatment location immediately prior to ICU admission. The APACHE III prognostic system consists of two options: (1) an APACHE III score, which can provide initial risk stratification for severely ill hospitalized patients within independently defined patient groups; and (2) an APACHE III predictive equation, which uses APACHE III score and reference data on major disease categories and treatment location immediately prior to ICU admission to provide risk estimates for hospital mortality for individual ICU patients. A five-point increase in APACHE III score (range, 0 to 299) is independently associated with a statistically significant increase in the relative risk of hospital death (odds ratio, 1.10 to 1.78) within each of 78 major medical and surgical disease categories. The overall predictive accuracy of the first-day APACHE III equation was such that, within 24 h of ICU admission, 95 percent of ICU admissions could be given a risk estimate for hospital death that was within 3 percent of that actually observed (r2 = 0.41; receiver operating characteristic = 0.90). Recording changes in the APACHE III score on each subsequent day of ICU therapy provided daily updates in these risk estimates. When applied across the individual ICUs, the first-day APACHE III equation accounted for the majority of variation in observed death rates (r2 = 0.90, p<0.0001).

Muscle weakness is common in the surgical intensive care unit (ICU). Low muscle mass at ICU admission is a significant predictor of adverse outcomes. The consequences of ICU-acquired muscle weakness depend on the underlying mechanism. Temporary drug-induced weakness when properly managed may not affect outcome. Severe perioperative acquired weakness that is associated with adverse outcomes (prolonged mechanical ventilation, increases in ICU length of stay, and mortality) occurs with persistent (time frame: days) activation of protein degradation pathways, decreases in the drive to the skeletal muscle, and impaired muscular homeostasis. ICU-acquired muscle weakness can be prevented by early treatment of the underlying disease, goal-directed therapy, restrictive use of immobilizing medications, optimal nutrition, activating ventilatory modes, early rehabilitation, and preventive drug therapy. In this article, the authors review the nosology, epidemiology, diagnosis, and prevention of ICU-acquired weakness in surgical ICU patients.

The family is one of the basic units of society and has a great influence on its members. When a family member becomes ill, the illness affects the well-being of other family members, causing changes in the life of the whole family. Critical illness often occurs without warning and there is little time for patients and their families to prepare. If family members’ immediate needs can be met, desirable consequences for both family members and patients can be achieved. In order to meet family member’s needs, critical care units’ nurses must be able to identify their needs accurately [1, 2]. Every year in the United States, approximately 20% of all deaths occur in an intensive care unit (ICU), and family members suffer from being withdrawn or withheld. Many of patients are unable to communicate because of sedation, mechanical ventilation, confusion, and comatose. This results in much of the burden of decision-making and treatment choices on the patients’ family members. This may affect family members by increasing their stress levels and increasing their risk for psychological and physical symptoms [3].