Background & Aims: Different scoring systems are used in order to assess the functional quality of intensive care units (ICU) and to predict the required costs and facilities of intensive cares. Variety of scoring systems has been explained that each has advantages and disadvantages. In this study Simplified Acute PHYSIOLOGY Score-III (SAPS-III) and Mortality Probability Model-III (MPM-III) were compared. Materials & Methods: The current cross-sectional study was conducted on 240 non-traumatic patients admitted at ICU of Al-Zahra Hospital in 2016-17. Patients' information including demographics, mean of systolic, diastolic and arterial pressure, pulse rate, respiratory rate, temperature, Glasgow Coma Scale(GCS), WBC, hematocrit, bilirubin, creatinine, arterial blood gas, and the presence of underlying diseases was gathered from the records for measurement of MPM-III and SAPS-III scores and then they were compared. Results: This study was conducted on 240 non-traumatic patients. Discrimination of MPM-III in cutoff point of 0. 17 was 0. 83(P<0. 001; 95%CI: 0. 765-0. 898), sensitivity and specificity of this test in prediction of non-traumatic mortality was 82% and 73%, respectively. Discrimination of SAPS-III in cut-off of 48. 5 was 0. 78(P<0. 001; 95%CI: 0. 72-0. 84), while its sensitivity and specificity was 83% and 70%, respectively. Duration of ICU hospitalization (P=0. 028 and 0. 002) and duration of intubation (P=0. 001 and <0. 001) had direct association with mortality based on both scoring systems while total duration of hospitalization was only significant in SAPSIII (P=0. 002). Conclusion: Comparison of SAPS-III and MPM-III in non-traumatic patients presented a higher discrimination ability for MPM-III. In addition, findings showed that mortality in MPM-III was in association with duration of ICU admission and intubation while for SAPS-III, in addition to previous factors, total duration of hospitalization was associated as well.

Background: Intensive care unit (ICU) is among the most important hospital wards. Variety of scoring systems for evaluation of patients' status and prediction of hospitalization outcomes in ICU has been raised that each has strong and weak points; assessment of these characteristics tends to promote new scoring systems. The current study compared scoring systems of Mortality Probability Model-III (MPM-III) and Simplified Acute PHYSIOLOGY Score-III (SAPS-III) in trauma patients in ICU. Methods: This randomized cross-sectional study was conducted on 200 patients admitted in ICU because of trauma in years 2016-17. Patients' information including demographics, mean of systolic, diastolic, and arterial blood pressure, pulse, respiratory rate, temperature, Glasgow coma scale (GCS), arterial gas analysis, white blood cell (WBC) counts, hematocrit, bilirubin, creatinine, type of admission, and presence of underlying diseases were extracted from records; MPM-III and SAPS-III were measured for these patients and compared. Findings: MPM-III scoring system had discrimination of 0. 935 [95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0. 89-0. 97; P < 0. 001) in cut-off point of 0. 13, and its sensitivity and specificity was 87% and 84%, respectively. For SAPS-III system, in cut-off point of 0. 13, the discrimination was 0. 77 (95%CI: 0. 69-0. 85; P < 0. 001), with the sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 68%. Based on both MPM-III and SAPS-III systems, mortality was in correlation with duration of ICU admission (P = 0. 001 for both systems) and duration of intubation (P < 0. 001 for both systems), while only for SAPS-III, total duration of hospitalization was in correlation with mortality (P < 0. 001). Conclusion: MPM-III scoring system was superior to SAPS-III regarding discrimination power in trauma patients. In addition, based on both systems, mortality rate was in direct association with days of ICU admission and intubation duration.

Introduction: The cases of misconceptions are intellectual models of phenomena that are different from accepted scientific models of the same phenomena. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence of cardiovascular misconceptions among students, and evaluate the role of cardiovascular PHYSIOLOGY courses in eliminating them.Methods: This descriptive study was performed on 348 undergraduates in three faculties of medicine, nursing, and biology of Arak University of Medical Sciences and Arak University (year 2009). Students were asked to answer four cardiovascular questions through a questionnaire. The answers of students were analyzed by SPSS software using descriptive statistic and two tailed comparison of proportions to reveal any difference between groups.Results: The prevalence of misconception about comparison of left and right ventricular output ranged from 80 to 98 percents. The misconception was prevalent among 79 to 84 percent of students considering pulse velocity comparison to blood velocity in vessel. Between 95 to 99 percent of them had this problem about the effect of resistance increase on blood flow. Sixty Nine to 73 percent of students had trouble with parallel resistance and effect of removal of one limb on total peripheral resistance. Overall, passing cardiovascular PHYSIOLOGY courses was not accompanied with significantly different rate of misconceptions.Conclusion: There is a wide prevalence of misconception about at least 4 cardiovascular concepts among students, and passing the courses of cardiovascular PHYSIOLOGY has significant effect in reducing this prevalence.