Pneumonia scoring systems for severe COVID-19: which one is better

Virol J. 2021 Feb 10;18(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s12985-021-01502-6.

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the predictive significance of different pneumonia scoring systems in clinical severity and mortality risk of patients with severe novel coronavirus pneumonia.

Materials and methods: A total of 53 cases of severe novel coronavirus pneumonia were confirmed. The APACHE II, MuLBSTA and CURB-65 scores of different treatment methods were calculated, and the predictive power of each score on clinical respiratory support treatment and mortality risk was compared.

Results: The APACHE II score showed the largest area under ROC curve in both noninvasive and invasive respiratory support treatment assessments, which is significantly different from that of CURB-65. Further, the MuLBSTA score had the largest area under ROC curve in terms of death risk assessment, which is also significantly different from that of CURB-65; however, no difference was noted with the APACHE II score.

Conclusion: For patients with COVID, the APACHE II score is an effective predictor of the disease severity and mortality risk. Further, the MuLBSTA score is a good predictor only in terms of mortality risk.

Keywords: APACHE II score; CURB-65 score; Disease assessment; MuLBSTA score; Novel coronavirus pneumonia.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • APACHE
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • COVID-19 / diagnosis*
  • COVID-19 / mortality
  • COVID-19 / therapy
  • COVID-19 / virology
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Pneumonia / diagnosis*
  • Pneumonia / mortality
  • Pneumonia / therapy
  • Pneumonia / virology
  • Prognosis
  • ROC Curve
  • Risk Assessment
  • SARS-CoV-2
  • Severity of Illness Index
  • Young Adult