OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review of the Probability of Repeated Admission (Pra) score in community-dwelling adults to assess its performance in a range of validation studies in the community setting. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING: Primary and community care. PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling older people. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was hospital admission; secondary outcomes were mortality, hospital days, functional decline, other health service use, and costs. RESULTS: Nine validation studies describing 11 cohorts of individuals aged 65 and older were identified. A metaanalysis of the Pra score in five cohorts (8,843 individuals) with comparable and available data revealed good discrimination performance (summary area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 69.7% (standard error 2.8%)). Pooled specificity was high (96%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=95.8–96.7%), indicating that a Pra score of 0.5 or greater effectively rules in the likelihood of admission, but pooled sensitivity was low (12%, 95% CI=10.5–13.6%). Calibration performance was good, with an overall risk ratio of 1.12 (95% CI=0.89–1.42), indicating that the Pra score reliably predicted hospital admissions. CONCLUSION: The Pra score performs well in predicting hospital admission in community-dwelling adults categorized as high risk according to the score. This tool has clinical and healthcare policy utility in terms of targeting elderly people at highest risk of hospital admission, but the low pooled sensitivity of the score indicates that it is not a reliable way of excluding hospital admission in those stratified as low risk.
OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review of the Probability of Repeated Admission (Pra) score in community-dwelling adults to assess its performance in a range of validation studies in the community setting. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING: Primary and community care. PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling older people. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was hospital admission; secondary outcomes were mortality, hospital days, functional decline, other health service use, and costs. RESULTS: Nine validation studies describing 11 cohorts of individuals aged 65 and older were identified. A metaanalysis of the Pra score in five cohorts (8,843 individuals) with comparable and available data revealed good discrimination performance (summary area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 69.7% (standard error 2.8%)). Pooled specificity was high (96%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=95.8–96.7%), indicating that a Pra score of 0.5 or greater effectively rules in the likelihood of admission, but pooled sensitivity was low (12%, 95% CI=10.5–13.6%). Calibration performance was good, with an overall risk ratio of 1.12 (95% CI=0.89–1.42), indicating that the Pra score reliably predicted hospital admissions. CONCLUSION: The Pra score performs well in predicting hospital admission in community-dwelling adults categorized as high risk according to the score. This tool has clinical and healthcare policy utility in terms of targeting elderly people at highest risk of hospital admission, but the low pooled sensitivity of the score indicates that it is not a reliable way of excluding hospital admission in those stratified as low risk.
Authors: William J Deardorff; Richard J Sloane; Juliessa M Pavon; Susan N Hastings; Heather E Whitson Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-08-27 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Ana Isabel Gonzalez-Gonzalez; Christine Schmucker; Julia Nothacker; Truc Sophia Nguyen; Maria-Sophie Brueckle; Jeanet Blom; Marjan van den Akker; Kristian Röttger; Odette Wegwarth; Tammy Hoffmann; Ferdinand M Gerlach; Sharon E Straus; Joerg J Meerpohl; Christiane Muth Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Khader Shameer; M Mercedes Perez-Rodriguez; Roy Bachar; Li Li; Amy Johnson; Kipp W Johnson; Benjamin S Glicksberg; Milo R Smith; Ben Readhead; Joseph Scarpa; Jebakumar Jebakaran; Patricia Kovatch; Sabina Lim; Wayne Goodman; David L Reich; Andrew Kasarskis; Nicholas P Tatonetti; Joel T Dudley Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2018-09-14 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Emma Wallace; Frank Moriarty; Christine McGarrigle; Susan M Smith; Rose-Anne Kenny; Tom Fahey Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-10-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Beate S Müller; Lorenz Uhlmann; Peter Ihle; Christian Stock; Fiona von Buedingen; Martin Beyer; Ferdinand M Gerlach; Rafael Perera; Jose Maria Valderas; Paul Glasziou; Marjan van den Akker; Christiane Muth Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-10-22 Impact factor: 2.692