Literature DB >> 15955609

The use of routine laboratory data to predict in-hospital death in medical admissions.

D R Prytherch1, J S Sirl, P Schmidt, P I Featherstone, P C Weaver, G B Smith.   

Abstract

The ability to predict clinical outcomes in the early phase of a patient's hospital admission could facilitate the optimal use of resources, might allow focused surveillance of high-risk patients and might permit early therapy. We investigated the hypothesis that the risk of in-hospital death of general medical patients can be modelled using a small number of commonly used laboratory and administrative items available within the first few hours of hospital admission. Matched administrative and laboratory data from 9497 adult hospital discharges, with a hospital discharge specialty of general medicine, were divided into two subsets. The dataset was split into a single development set, Q(1) (n=2257), and three validation sets, Q(2), Q(3) and Q(4) (n(1)=2335, n(2)=2361, n(3)=2544). Hospital outcome (survival/non-survival) was obtained for all discharges. An outcome model was constructed from binary logistic regression of the development set data. The goodness-of-fit of the model for the validation sets was tested using receiver-operating characteristics curves (c-index) and Hosmer-Lemeshow statistics. Application of the model to the validation sets produced c-indices of 0.779 (Q(2)), 0.764 (Q(3)) and 0.757 (Q(4)), respectively, indicating good discrimination. Hosmer-Lemeshow analysis gave chi(2)=9.43 (Q(2)), chi(2)=7.39 (Q(3)) and chi(2)=8.00 (Q(4)) (p-values of 0.307, 0.495 and 0.433) for 8 degrees of freedom, indicating good calibration. The finding that the risk of hospital death can be predicted with routinely available data very early on after hospital admission has several potential uses. It raises the possibility that the surveillance and treatment of patients might be categorised by risk assessment means. Such a system might also be used to assess clinical performance, to evaluate the benefits of introducing acute care interventions or to investigate differences between acute care systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15955609     DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2005.02.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Resuscitation        ISSN: 0300-9572            Impact factor:   5.262


  18 in total

Review 1.  Sepsis: recognition and treatment.

Authors:  J Soong; N Soni
Journal:  Clin Med (Lond)       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.659

2.  The value of administrative databases.

Authors:  Mohammed A Mohammed; Andrew Stevens
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-05-19

3.  Consultant duration of clinical practice as a cost determinant of an emergency medical admission.

Authors:  Seán Cournane; Richard Conway; Donnacha Creagh; Declan G Byrne; Bernard Silke
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2014-07-09

4.  Part 12: Education, implementation, and teams: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations.

Authors:  Jasmeet Soar; Mary E Mancini; Farhan Bhanji; John E Billi; Jennifer Dennett; Judith Finn; Matthew Huei-Ming Ma; Gavin D Perkins; David L Rodgers; Mary Fran Hazinski; Ian Jacobs; Peter T Morley
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 5.262

Review 5.  Risk scoring systems for adults admitted to the emergency department: a systematic review.

Authors:  Mikkel Brabrand; Lars Folkestad; Nicola Groes Clausen; Torben Knudsen; Jesper Hallas
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2010-02-11       Impact factor: 2.953

6.  Identifying admitted patients at risk of dying: a prospective observational validation of four biochemical scoring systems.

Authors:  Mikkel Brabrand; Torben Knudsen; Jesper Hallas
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  The ALERT scale: an observational study of early prediction of adverse hospital outcome for medical patients.

Authors:  Daniel Roberts; Ward Patrick; Julie Mojica; Patricia Ostryzniuk; Margaret Patrick; Chris MacKnight; Allen Kraut; Leigh Anne Shafer
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-04-13       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Prognostic performance of the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) and Worthing Physiological Scoring system (WPS) in emergency department.

Authors:  Duc T Ha; Tam Q Dang; Ngoc V Tran; Nhi Y Vo; Nguyen D Nguyen; Tuan V Nguyen
Journal:  Int J Emerg Med       Date:  2015-06-04

9.  Index blood tests and national early warning scores within 24 hours of emergency admission can predict the risk of in-hospital mortality: a model development and validation study.

Authors:  Mohammed A Mohammed; Gavin Rudge; Duncan Watson; Gordon Wood; Gary B Smith; David R Prytherch; Alan Girling; Andrew Stevens
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Which is more useful in predicting hospital mortality--dichotomised blood test results or actual test values? A retrospective study in two hospitals.

Authors:  Mohammed A Mohammed; Gavin Rudge; Gordon Wood; Gary Smith; Vishal Nangalia; David Prytherch; Roger Holder; Jim Briggs
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-15       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.