Anne O'Callaghan1, George Laking2, Rosemary Frey3, Jackie Robinson4, Merryn Gott3. 1. Palliative Care, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand anneo@adhb.govt.nz. 2. Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand Oncology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand. 3. Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. 4. Palliative Care, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Screening to identify hospital inpatients with a short life expectancy may be a way to improve care towards the end of life. The Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance is a screening tool that has recently been advocated for use in the hospital setting. AIM: To assess the clinical utility of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance as a screening tool in an acute hospital setting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality at 6 and 12 months and sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance at 1 year. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective cross-sectional study of 501 adult inpatients in a tertiary New Zealand teaching hospital screened utilising the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients were identified as meeting at least one of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance triggers. In this group, 6-month mortality was 56.6% and 12-month mortality was 67.7% compared with 5.2% and 10%, respectively, for those not identified as meeting the criteria. The sensitivity and specificity of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance at 1 year were 62.6% and 91.9%, respectively, with a positive predictive value of 67.7% and a negative predictive value of 90.0%. CONCLUSION: The sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance in this study are comparable to, or better than, results of studies identifying patients with a limited life expectancy in particular disease states (e.g. heart failure and renal failure). Screening utilising the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance in the acute setting could be the first step towards implementing a more systematic way of addressing patient need--both current unrecognised and future anticipated--thereby improving outcomes for this population.
BACKGROUND: Screening to identify hospital inpatients with a short life expectancy may be a way to improve care towards the end of life. The Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance is a screening tool that has recently been advocated for use in the hospital setting. AIM: To assess the clinical utility of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance as a screening tool in an acute hospital setting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality at 6 and 12 months and sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance at 1 year. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective cross-sectional study of 501 adult inpatients in a tertiary New Zealand teaching hospital screened utilising the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients were identified as meeting at least one of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance triggers. In this group, 6-month mortality was 56.6% and 12-month mortality was 67.7% compared with 5.2% and 10%, respectively, for those not identified as meeting the criteria. The sensitivity and specificity of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance at 1 year were 62.6% and 91.9%, respectively, with a positive predictive value of 67.7% and a negative predictive value of 90.0%. CONCLUSION: The sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance in this study are comparable to, or better than, results of studies identifying patients with a limited life expectancy in particular disease states (e.g. heart failure and renal failure). Screening utilising the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance in the acute setting could be the first step towards implementing a more systematic way of addressing patient need--both current unrecognised and future anticipated--thereby improving outcomes for this population.
Authors: Paola Pacetti; Giovanni Paganini; Massimo Orlandi; Andrea Mambrini; M Cristina Pennucci; Alfonso Del Freo; Maurizio Cantore Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Emma Carduff; Sarah Johnston; Catherine Winstanley; Jamie Morrish; Scott A Murray; Juliet Spiller; Anne Finucane Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 3.234
Authors: Jolien Jeltje Glaudemans; Eric Moll van Charante; Jan Wind; John Jacob Oosterink; Dick Ludolf Willems Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-11-25 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Dorothy McCaughan; Eve Roman; Alexandra G Smith; Anne C Garry; Miriam J Johnson; Russell D Patmore; Martin R Howard; Debra A Howell Journal: Eur J Oncol Nurs Date: 2019-02-07 Impact factor: 2.398
Authors: Margaret Glogowska; Rosemary Simmonds; Sarah McLachlan; Helen Cramer; Tom Sanders; Rachel Johnson; Umesh T Kadam; Daniel S Lasserson; Sarah Purdy Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2016-01-14 Impact factor: 3.234