10– 12 This is underlined by the increasing weight ascribed to comorbidity in the most recent developed severity-of-illness models, such as the SAPS III model.
General severity-of-illness models can be inaccurate when applied to specific groups of patients, even if they are valid for comparing outcomes in large numbers of patients [ 3], and the inaccuracy of these models makes them inappropriate for predicting individual outcome [ 4, 5].
After adjusting for a priori variables of age and gender (model 1), and time to initiation of antibiotic therapy and severity of illness (model 2), the association remained significant.
However, the severity of this model and the non-specific neurological lesions (spongiform cortical lesions) compromise the use of this model for neuropathophysiological studies.
In addition, the trauma severity of our model is more clinically meaningful because the presence of very severe trauma, such as major vascular injury and grade IV/V liver injury, is associated with a greater risk of mortality before arriving at the operation room, and milder trauma can generally be cured through conservative treatment.
The severity of this model means that any long-term deleterious or beneficial effects of the antibody remain unknown.
In our study, the volume of urine output was decreased in the 2 groups reflecting the severity of our model.
By design, due to the severity of the model, it was not possible to assess the long-term effect of chloride renal toxicity.
This may reflect the severity of our model with a prolonged ischemia time that produces an injury that is not dependent upon leukocytes [7].
However, due to the severity of the model the limited sample size appears to be less critical as the subjects' stress responses with or without motion sickness were clearly distinguishable.
