Literature DB >> 34779870

Prediction of recovery in trauma patients using Latent Markov models.

Roos Johanna Maria Havermans1,2, Felix Johannes Clouth3, Koen Willem Wouter Lansink4,5, Jeroen Kornelis Vermunt3, Mariska Adriana Cornelia de Jongh5, Leonie de Munter6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Patients' expectations during recovery after a trauma can affect the recovery. The aim of the present study was to identify different physical recovery trajectories based on Latent Markov Models (LMMs) and predict these recovery states based on individual patient characteristics.
METHODS: The data of a cohort of adult trauma patients until the age of 75 years with a length of hospital stay of 3 days and more were derived from the Brabant Injury Outcome Surveillance (BIOS) study. The EuroQol-5D 3-level version and the Health Utilities Index were used 1 week, and 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after injury. Four prediction models, for mobility, pain, self-care, and daily activity, were developed using LMMs with ordinal latent states and patient characteristics as predictors for the latent states.
RESULTS: In total, 1107 patients were included. Four models with three ordinal latent states were developed, with different covariates in each model. The prediction of the (ordinal) latent states in the LMMs yielded pseudo-R2 values between 40 and 53% and between 21 and 41% (depending of the type R2 used) and classification errors between 24 and 40%. Most patients seem to recover fast as only about a quarter of the patients remain with severe problems after 1 month.
CONCLUSION: The use of LMMs to model the development of physical function post-injury is a promising way to obtain a prediction of the physical recovery. The step-by-step prediction fits well with the outpatient follow-up and it can be used to inform the patients more tailor-made to manage the expectations.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Latent Markov model; Physical function; Recovery; Trauma

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34779870     DOI: 10.1007/s00068-021-01798-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg        ISSN: 1863-9933            Impact factor:   3.693


  5 in total

Review 1.  Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

Authors:  Dawn Stacey; France Légaré; Krystina Lewis; Michael J Barry; Carol L Bennett; Karen B Eden; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Anne Lyddiatt; Richard Thomson; Lyndal Trevena
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-04-12

2.  The Impact of a Pan-regional Inclusive Trauma System on Quality of Care.

Authors:  Elaine Cole; Fiona Lecky; Anita West; Neil Smith; Karim Brohi; Ross Davenport
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Influence of access to an integrated trauma system on in-hospital mortality and length of stay.

Authors:  Brice L Batomen Kuimi; Lynne Moore; Brahim Cissé; Mathieu Gagné; André Lavoie; Gilles Bourgeois; Jean Lapointe
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2015-03-09       Impact factor: 2.586

4.  The development and internal validation of a model to predict functional recovery after trauma.

Authors:  Max W de Graaf; Inge H F Reininga; Erik Heineman; Mostafa El Moumni
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The impact of decision aids in patients with colorectal cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jenaya Goldwag; Priscilla Marsicovetere; Peter Scalia; Heather A Johnson; Marie-Anne Durand; Glyn Elwyn; Srinivas J Ivatury
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-09-12       Impact factor: 2.692

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.