Scores2Go
ICU · Severity · Mortality

SAPS 3

Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3 predicts in-hospital mortality using 20 variables collected at ICU admission. Validated in 19,577 patients across 35 countries.

Moreno et al. 2005 Popularity 78

Overview

SAPS 3 is organised into three boxes collecting information available at the time of ICU admission, derived and validated in a cohort of 19,577 patients across 35 countries [1]. The total score ranges from 0 to 217 points, which is converted to a predicted in-hospital mortality probability via a logistic regression equation [2]. Unlike APACHE II, SAPS 3 offers seven region-specific equations in addition to a global/pooled equation, to correct for international differences in case mix and hospital structure — see Scientific Validity & Limitations below for which one Scores2Go implements.

Box I — Patient Information

VariableCategoryPoints
Age< 40 years0
40–59 years5
60–69 years9
70–74 years13
75–79 years15
≥ 80 years18
CHF (NYHA IV)Present6
CirrhosisPresent4
Alcohol abusePresent3
Solid tumourPresent6
Haematological malignancyPresent6
Metastatic cancerPresent9
AIDSPresent8

Box II — Admission Circumstances

VariableCategoryPoints
Pre-ICU locationRecovery / post-op−6
Emergency room0
Other hospital0
Hospital ward6
Direct admission0
Planned (elective) surgical admissionYes−6
Reason for ICUSepsis5
Respiratory failure4
Cardiac arrest10
Cardiac rhythm disorder5
Trauma−8
Intoxication / overdose−13
Intracranial mass effect7
Elective surgery−6

Box III — Acute Physiology

VariableCategoryPoints
GCS150
13–144
10–127
7–910
3–615
Bilirubin (mg/dL)< 20
2–5.94
6–8.95
≥ 96
Temperature (°C)< 354
35–39.90
≥ 403
Heart rate (bpm)< 4011
40–592
60–1190
120–1594
≥ 1607
MAP (mmHg)< 4018
40–697
70–1190
≥ 1203
Creatinine (mg/dL)< 1.20
1.2–1.992
2.0–3.497
≥ 3.58
Platelets (×10³/µL)< 2013
20–498
50–995
100–1493
≥ 1500
WBC (×10³/µL)< 112
1–14.90
≥ 153
Arterial pH< 7.0014
7.00–7.2411
7.25–7.326
7.33–7.490
≥ 7.503
PaO₂/FiO₂ (mmHg)< 10011
100–1999
≥ 2005

Mortality Formula

logit = −32.6659 + ln(SAPS 3 score + 20.5958) × 7.3068

Predicted mortality = e^logit / (1 + e^logit)
This is the global (pooled) equation from the original derivation. Seven additional region-specific equations (Australasia, Central/South America, Central/Western Europe, Eastern Europe, North America, Northern Europe, Southern Europe/Mediterranean) exist for improved local calibration [2] — Scores2Go currently implements only the global equation, not the regional variants.

Risk Classification

Predicted MortalityRisk Class
< 10 %Low
10–25 %Moderate
25–50 %High
> 50 %Very high
These risk-class labels are an informal, illustrative grouping of the computed percentage for quick reading — they are not a banding scheme defined in the original publication. The precise computed percentage (shown alongside) is the actual output of the validated equation; treat the label as a rough guide, not a separately validated cutoff.

Scientific Validity & Limitations

SAPS 3's defining methodological feature is its explicit regionalization: because case mix, admission thresholds, and ICU practice vary systematically by world region, the original derivation produced both a global/pooled equation and seven region-specific equations with different coefficients [2]. A calculator that only offers the global equation (as Scores2Go currently does) will tend to be less well-calibrated in any single region than the matching regional equation would be — this is a known, designed-for trade-off rather than a defect in the global equation itself, but it's worth knowing which version you're looking at.

A systematic review of 28 external validation studies of SAPS 3 found considerable heterogeneity in reported calibration across settings and eras, with performance often degrading outside the original derivation cohort's regions and time period [3]. A separate European multicenter analysis of SAPS II and SAPS 3 found both scores' calibration drifts over time and differs by country, driven partly by changes in case mix and treatment practice since the original derivation [4]. A large external validation in 48,816 patients across 72 Brazilian ICUs found reasonable discrimination but calibration that diverged from the original cohort, illustrating the same regional-drift pattern in a specific, well-documented setting [5].

Well-documented structural limitations, independent of any single validation study:

Literature

  1. Metnitz PG, Moreno RP, Almeida E, et al. SAPS 3 — From evaluation of the patient to evaluation of the intensive care unit. Part 1: Objectives, methods and cohort description. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31(10):1336–1344.
  2. Moreno RP, Metnitz PG, Almeida E, et al. SAPS 3 — From evaluation of the patient to evaluation of the intensive care unit. Part 2: Development of a prognostic model for hospital mortality at ICU admission. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31(10):1345–1355.
  3. Nassar AP Jr, Malbouisson LMS, Moreno R. Evaluation of simplified acute physiology score 3 performance: a systematic review of external validation studies. Crit Care. 2014;18:R117.
  4. Poncet A, Perneger TV, Merlani P, Capuzzo M, Combescure C. Determinants of the calibration of SAPS II and SAPS 3 mortality scores in intensive care: a European multicenter study. Crit Care. 2017;21:85.
  5. Moralez GM, Rabello LSCF, Lisboa TC, et al. External validation of SAPS 3 and MPM0-III scores in 48,816 patients from 72 Brazilian ICUs. Ann Intensive Care. 2017;7:53.
  6. Vincent JL, Moreno R. Clinical review: scoring systems in the critically ill. Crit Care. 2010;14(2):207.

Calculate the SAPS 3 score interactively in the app.

Open in Scores2Go

For research and educational purposes only. Not intended for direct clinical decision-making.