A-qCPR risk score screening model for predicting 1-year mortality associated with hospice and palliative care in the emergency department.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	A-qCPR risk score screening model for predicting 1-year mortality associated with hospice and palliative care in the emergency department.
Authors:	Wang, Ruei-Fang, Lai, Chao-Chih, Fu, Ping-Yeh, Huang, Yung-Chung, Huang, Sheng-Jean, Chu, Dachen, Lin, Shih-Pin, Chaou, Chung-Hsien, Hsu, Chen-Yang, Chen, Hsiu-Hsi
Source:	Palliative Medicine. Feb2021, Vol. 35 Issue 2, p408-416. 9p.
Subjects:	Experimental design, Hospice care, Hospital emergency services, Research methodology, Palliative treatment, Regression analysis, Risk assessment, Predictive validity, Retrospective studies, Descriptive statistics
Abstract:	Background: Evaluating the need for palliative care and predicting its mortality play important roles in the emergency department. Aim: We developed a screening model for predicting 1-year mortality. Design: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to identify risk factors associated with 1-year mortality. Our risk scores based on these significant risk factors were then developed. Its predictive validity performance was evaluated using area under receiving operating characteristic analysis and leave-one-out cross-validation. Setting and participants: Patients aged 15 years or older were enrolled from June 2015 to May 2016 in the emergency department. Results: We identified five independent risk factors, each of which was assigned a number of points proportional to its estimated regression coefficient: age (0.05 points per year), qSOFA ⩾ 2 (1), Cancer (4), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score ⩾ 2 (2), and Do-Not- R esuscitate status (3). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of our screening tool given the cutoff larger than 3 points were 0.99 (0.98–0.99), 0.31 (0.29–0.32), 0.26 (0.24–0.27), and 0.99 (0.98–1.00), respectively. Those with screening scores larger than 9 points corresponding to 64.0% (60.0–67.9%) of 1-year mortality were prioritized for consultation and communication. The area under the receiving operating characteristic curves for the point system was 0.84 (0.83–0.85) for the cross-validation model. Conclusions: A-qCPR risk scores provide a good screening tool for assessing patient prognosis. Routine screening for end-of-life using this tool plays an important role in early and efficient physician-patient communications regarding hospice and palliative needs in the emergency department. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Palliative Medicine is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection

Description
Abstract:	Background: Evaluating the need for palliative care and predicting its mortality play important roles in the emergency department. Aim: We developed a screening model for predicting 1-year mortality. Design: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to identify risk factors associated with 1-year mortality. Our risk scores based on these significant risk factors were then developed. Its predictive validity performance was evaluated using area under receiving operating characteristic analysis and leave-one-out cross-validation. Setting and participants: Patients aged 15 years or older were enrolled from June 2015 to May 2016 in the emergency department. Results: We identified five independent risk factors, each of which was assigned a number of points proportional to its estimated regression coefficient: age (0.05 points per year), qSOFA ⩾ 2 (1), Cancer (4), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score ⩾ 2 (2), and Do-Not- R esuscitate status (3). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of our screening tool given the cutoff larger than 3 points were 0.99 (0.98–0.99), 0.31 (0.29–0.32), 0.26 (0.24–0.27), and 0.99 (0.98–1.00), respectively. Those with screening scores larger than 9 points corresponding to 64.0% (60.0–67.9%) of 1-year mortality were prioritized for consultation and communication. The area under the receiving operating characteristic curves for the point system was 0.84 (0.83–0.85) for the cross-validation model. Conclusions: A-qCPR risk scores provide a good screening tool for assessing patient prognosis. Routine screening for end-of-life using this tool plays an important role in early and efficient physician-patient communications regarding hospice and palliative needs in the emergency department. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	02692163
DOI:	10.1177/0269216320972041