应用全髋关节和膝关节置换术护理模型:对已发布的预测模型进行外部验证,以确定下肢关节置换术前延长住院时间的风险。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Clinical Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-20 DOI:10.1177/02692155241233348
Meredith Harrison-Brown, Corey Scholes, Milad Ebrahimi, Christopher Bell, Garry Kirwan
{"title":"应用全髋关节和膝关节置换术护理模型:对已发布的预测模型进行外部验证,以确定下肢关节置换术前延长住院时间的风险。","authors":"Meredith Harrison-Brown, Corey Scholes, Milad Ebrahimi, Christopher Bell, Garry Kirwan","doi":"10.1177/02692155241233348","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to externally validate a reported model for identifying patients requiring extended stay following lower limb arthroplasty in a new setting.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>External validation of a previously reported prognostic model, using retrospective data.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Medium-sized hospital orthopaedic department, Australia.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Electronic medical records were accessed for data collection between Sep-2019 and Feb-2020 and retrospective data extracted from 200 randomly selected total hip or knee arthroplasty patients.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Participants received total hip or knee replacement between 2-Feb-16 and 4-Apr-19. This study was a non-interventional retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Model validation was assessed with discrimination, calibration on both original and adjusted forms of the candidate model. Decision curve analysis was conducted on the outputs of the adjusted model to determine net benefit at a predetermined decision threshold (0.5).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The original model performed poorly, grossly overestimating length of stay with mean calibration of -3.6 (95% confidence interval -3.9 to -3.2) and calibration slope of 0.52. Performance improved following adjustment of the model intercept and model coefficients (mean calibration 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.80 and slope of 1.0), but remained poorly calibrated at low and medium risk threshold and net benefit was modest (three additional patients per hundred identified as at-risk) at the a-priori risk threshold.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>External validation demonstrated poor performance when applied to a new patient population and would provide limited benefit for our institution. Implementation of predictive models for arthroplasty should include practical assessment of discrimination, calibration and net benefit at a clinically acceptable threshold.</p>","PeriodicalId":10441,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"700-712"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Applying models of care for total hip and knee arthroplasty: External validation of a published predictive model to identify extended stay risk prior to lower-limb arthroplasty.\",\"authors\":\"Meredith Harrison-Brown, Corey Scholes, Milad Ebrahimi, Christopher Bell, Garry Kirwan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02692155241233348\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to externally validate a reported model for identifying patients requiring extended stay following lower limb arthroplasty in a new setting.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>External validation of a previously reported prognostic model, using retrospective data.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Medium-sized hospital orthopaedic department, Australia.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Electronic medical records were accessed for data collection between Sep-2019 and Feb-2020 and retrospective data extracted from 200 randomly selected total hip or knee arthroplasty patients.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Participants received total hip or knee replacement between 2-Feb-16 and 4-Apr-19. This study was a non-interventional retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Model validation was assessed with discrimination, calibration on both original and adjusted forms of the candidate model. Decision curve analysis was conducted on the outputs of the adjusted model to determine net benefit at a predetermined decision threshold (0.5).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The original model performed poorly, grossly overestimating length of stay with mean calibration of -3.6 (95% confidence interval -3.9 to -3.2) and calibration slope of 0.52. Performance improved following adjustment of the model intercept and model coefficients (mean calibration 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.80 and slope of 1.0), but remained poorly calibrated at low and medium risk threshold and net benefit was modest (three additional patients per hundred identified as at-risk) at the a-priori risk threshold.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>External validation demonstrated poor performance when applied to a new patient population and would provide limited benefit for our institution. Implementation of predictive models for arthroplasty should include practical assessment of discrimination, calibration and net benefit at a clinically acceptable threshold.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10441,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"700-712\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155241233348\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155241233348","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本研究旨在对已报道的一个模型进行外部验证,以确定下肢关节置换术后需要延长住院时间的患者:设计:利用回顾性数据对之前报道的预后模型进行外部验证:环境:澳大利亚中型医院骨科:在 2019 年 9 月至 2020 年 2 月期间访问电子病历收集数据,并从随机抽取的 200 名全髋或膝关节置换术患者中提取回顾性数据:参与者在 16 年 2 月 2 日至 19 年 4 月 4 日期间接受了全髋关节或膝关节置换术。本研究为非干预性回顾性研究:通过对候选模型的原始形式和调整形式进行辨别和校准,对模型验证进行评估。对调整后模型的输出结果进行决策曲线分析,以确定在预定决策阈值(0.5)下的净效益:原始模型表现不佳,严重高估了住院时间,平均校准值为-3.6(95% 置信区间为-3.9 至-3.2),校准斜率为 0.52。在对模型截距和模型系数进行调整后,性能有所改善(平均校准值为 0.48,95% 置信区间为 0.16 至 0.80,斜率为 1.0),但在中低风险阈值下校准效果仍然不佳,在先验风险阈值下净获益不大(每百名被识别为高风险的患者增加三名):外部验证在应用于新患者群体时表现不佳,对本机构的益处有限。关节置换术预测模型的实施应包括对临床可接受阈值的辨别、校准和净效益进行实际评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Applying models of care for total hip and knee arthroplasty: External validation of a published predictive model to identify extended stay risk prior to lower-limb arthroplasty.

Objective: This study aimed to externally validate a reported model for identifying patients requiring extended stay following lower limb arthroplasty in a new setting.

Design: External validation of a previously reported prognostic model, using retrospective data.

Setting: Medium-sized hospital orthopaedic department, Australia.

Participants: Electronic medical records were accessed for data collection between Sep-2019 and Feb-2020 and retrospective data extracted from 200 randomly selected total hip or knee arthroplasty patients.

Intervention: Participants received total hip or knee replacement between 2-Feb-16 and 4-Apr-19. This study was a non-interventional retrospective study.

Main measures: Model validation was assessed with discrimination, calibration on both original and adjusted forms of the candidate model. Decision curve analysis was conducted on the outputs of the adjusted model to determine net benefit at a predetermined decision threshold (0.5).

Results: The original model performed poorly, grossly overestimating length of stay with mean calibration of -3.6 (95% confidence interval -3.9 to -3.2) and calibration slope of 0.52. Performance improved following adjustment of the model intercept and model coefficients (mean calibration 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.80 and slope of 1.0), but remained poorly calibrated at low and medium risk threshold and net benefit was modest (three additional patients per hundred identified as at-risk) at the a-priori risk threshold.

Conclusions: External validation demonstrated poor performance when applied to a new patient population and would provide limited benefit for our institution. Implementation of predictive models for arthroplasty should include practical assessment of discrimination, calibration and net benefit at a clinically acceptable threshold.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Rehabilitation
Clinical Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
117
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Rehabilitation covering the whole field of disability and rehabilitation, this peer-reviewed journal publishes research and discussion articles and acts as a forum for the international dissemination and exchange of information amongst the large number of professionals involved in rehabilitation. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Physiotherapy-led care versus physician-led care for persons with low back pain: A systematic review. Effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment associated with transcranial direct current stimulation in individuals with chronic low back pain: A double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. Efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training with physical therapy for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prognostic factors of pain, disability, and poor outcomes in persons with neck pain - an umbrella review. Working towards consensus on the assessment of mood after severe acquired brain injury: Focus groups with UK-based professionals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1