Available scoring systems such as the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE), the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores are not designed to evaluate ICU-discharge risk factors [4 6].
Application of SMEM in the calculation of reservoir flood discharge risk shows that this method can make full use of the known information under the same conditions and obtain the corresponding probability distribution and the risk value.
Current AHA/ACC guidelines promote the use of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk scores to evaluate the in-hospital and post-discharge risk of ACS patients [1].
Thereafter, we evaluated the additional effect of the drugs on discharge risk.
However, there is no consensus on an ICU discharge risk stratification tool.
A number of studies have evaluated programs to look at ED discharge, largely from the perspective of reducing post-discharge risk.
DNR, Do Not Resuscitate; ICU, Intensive Care unit; SOI, Severity of Illness Our systematic review identified eight ICU discharge risk stratification tools evaluated in eight studies.
These two studies also prospectively defined the pre and post hospital discharge risk factors for falling in the immediate post-hospitalization period [ 12, 13].
Ideally, an ICU discharge risk stratification tool would forecast patient outcomes and, therefore, facilitate the delivery of safe (for example, reduce premature ICU discharge for high risk patients), effective (for example, target transition resources to high risk patients) and efficient (for example, expedite ICU discharge for low risk patients) care.
When comparing all nursing assessment in-hospital risks versus postdischarge risks, we found that the 'food' assessment (indicating a difficulty with chewing or swallowing or appetite) was an outlier, as are the 'psychiatric' and 'genitourinary' assessments, the post-discharge risk being proportionately much greater.
