Monday, April 9, 2018

Validation and comparison of two stroke prognostic models for in hospital, 30-day and 90-day mortality

And just what the fuck good does predicting mortality post stroke do? A great stroke association president would make sure useless research like this never occurs. 
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2396987317703581?
First Published March 30, 2017 Research Article



We aimed to validate and compare two clinical prognostic models for mortality which include the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS); the Age and NIHSS Score (ANS) and case mix model (CMM) of the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Program (SSNAP). The NIHSS on admission was also tested as a prognostic score.

Prospectively collected data from the SSNAP register for a cohort of patients (ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke) admitted over 1 year to Gloucestershire Royal Hospital, England were accessed. The ANS and CMM were calculated and tested for in hospital, 30-day and 90-day mortality using calibration plots with Hosmer–Lemeshow tests, receiver operating characteristics curves and other measures of prognostic accuracy.

Of 848 patients, 110 (12.9%) died in hospital, 112 (13.2%) at 30 days and 164 (19.2%) at 90 days. Calibration for all three scores was good, although Hosmer–Lemeshow test p values were <0.05 with the NIHSS alone for in hospital and 30-day deaths, suggesting deviation from good fit. The c-statistics for in hospital, 30-day and 90-day mortality were ANS (0.783, 0.782, 0.779) and CMM (0.783, 0.774, 0.758), respectively. The NIHSS alone showed fair discrimination but performed less well. A NIHSS score ≥6 was associated with significant mortality (p < 0.0001) in comparison to a score <6.

A simple prognostic model containing age and admission NIHSS only, performed as well as a more complex score at predicting in hospital, 30-day and 90-day mortality. Admission NIHSS recording should be encouraged for stroke registries.

No comments:

Post a Comment