• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

LACE 和 HOSPITAL 再入院风险评分在 CMS 目标和非目标条件下的比较。

Comparison of LACE and HOSPITAL Readmission Risk Scores for CMS Target and Nontarget Conditions.

机构信息

Center for Outcomes Research, Houston Methodist, Houston, TX.

Department of Surgery, Houston Methodist, Houston, TX.

出版信息

Am J Med Qual. 2022;37(4):299-306. doi: 10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000035. Epub 2021 Dec 20.

DOI:10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000035
PMID:34935684
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9241658/
Abstract

This study evaluated the utility and performance of the LACE index and HOSPITAL score with consideration of the type of diagnoses and assessed the accuracy of these models for predicting readmission risks in patient cohorts from 2 large academic medical centers. Admissions to 2 hospitals from 2011 to 2015, derived from the Vizient Clinical Data Base and regional health information exchange, were included in this study (291 886 encounters). Models were assessed using Bayesian information criterion and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. They were compared in CMS diagnosis-based cohorts and in 2 non-CMS cancer diagnosis-based cohorts. Overall, both models for readmission risk performed well, with LACE performing slightly better (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.73 versus 0.69; P ≤ 0.001). HOSPITAL consistently outperformed LACE among 4 CMS target diagnoses, lung cancer, and colon cancer. Both LACE and HOSPITAL predict readmission risks well in the overall population, but performance varies by salient, diagnosis-based risk factors.

摘要

本研究评估了 LACE 指数和 HOSPITAL 评分的实用性和性能,考虑了诊断类型,并评估了这些模型在预测来自 2 个大型学术医疗中心的患者队列再入院风险方面的准确性。该研究纳入了 2011 年至 2015 年来自 2 家医院的入院数据,这些数据来源于 Vizient 临床数据库和区域健康信息交换。使用贝叶斯信息准则和接收者操作特征曲线下面积评估模型。在 CMS 基于诊断的队列和 2 个非 CMS 癌症诊断队列中对这些模型进行了比较。总体而言,这两种再入院风险模型的性能都很好,LACE 略好(接受者操作特征曲线下面积为 0.73 对 0.69;P ≤ 0.001)。在 4 个 CMS 目标诊断(肺癌和结肠癌)中,HOSPITAL 始终优于 LACE。LACE 和 HOSPITAL 都能很好地预测总体人群的再入院风险,但基于显著诊断风险因素的表现有所不同。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/09d9/9241658/8ab8d87b9a67/jmq-37-299-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/09d9/9241658/49a27610f462/jmq-37-299-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/09d9/9241658/508a10f63db7/jmq-37-299-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/09d9/9241658/8ab8d87b9a67/jmq-37-299-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/09d9/9241658/49a27610f462/jmq-37-299-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/09d9/9241658/508a10f63db7/jmq-37-299-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/09d9/9241658/8ab8d87b9a67/jmq-37-299-g003.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparison of LACE and HOSPITAL Readmission Risk Scores for CMS Target and Nontarget Conditions.LACE 和 HOSPITAL 再入院风险评分在 CMS 目标和非目标条件下的比较。
Am J Med Qual. 2022;37(4):299-306. doi: 10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000035. Epub 2021 Dec 20.
2
HOSPITAL Score, LACE Index and LACE+ Index as predictors of 30-day readmission in patients with heart failure.医院评分、LACE 指数和 LACE+指数对心力衰竭患者 30 天再入院的预测价值。
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2020 Oct;25(5):166-167. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111271. Epub 2019 Nov 26.
3
Evaluating the predictive strength of the LACE index in identifying patients at high risk of hospital readmission following an inpatient episode: a retrospective cohort study.评估LACE指数在识别住院患者出院后再次入院高风险患者方面的预测强度:一项回顾性队列研究。
BMJ Open. 2017 Jul 13;7(7):e016921. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016921.
4
Evaluation of Patients at Risk of Hospital Readmission (PARR) and LACE Risk Score for New Zealand Context.针对新西兰情况的医院再入院风险患者(PARR)评估及LACE风险评分
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2018;252:21-26.
5
LACE+ Index as Predictor of 30-Day Readmission in Brain Tumor Population.LACE+指数作为脑肿瘤患者30天再入院的预测指标
World Neurosurg. 2019 Jul;127:e443-e448. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.03.169. Epub 2019 Mar 27.
6
The LACE+ index fails to predict 30-90 day readmission for supratentorial craniotomy patients: A retrospective series of 238 surgical procedures.LACE+指数无法预测幕上开颅手术患者30至90天的再入院情况:一项针对238例外科手术的回顾性研究。
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2019 Jul;182:79-83. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2019.04.026. Epub 2019 May 1.
7
External validation of the modified LACE+, LACE+, and LACE scores to predict readmission or death after hospital discharge.改良后的 LACE+、LACE+和 LACE 评分对外科出院后再入院或死亡的预测的验证。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2021 Dec;27(6):1390-1397. doi: 10.1111/jep.13579. Epub 2021 May 8.
8
The LACE index and risk factors of 14-day versus 30-day readmissions in children.LACE 指数与儿童 14 天和 30 天再入院风险因素的比较。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2023 May 26;35(2). doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzad032.
9
Validation of the LACE readmission and mortality prediction model in a large surgical cohort: Comparison of performance at preoperative assessment and discharge time points.在一个大型外科队列中验证 LACE 再入院和死亡率预测模型:术前评估和出院时间点的性能比较。
J Clin Anesth. 2019 Dec;58:22-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2019.04.039. Epub 2019 May 2.
10
Utility of the LACE index to assess risk of mortality and readmission in patients with spinal infections.LACE 指数在评估脊柱感染患者死亡和再入院风险中的应用。
Neurosurg Rev. 2024 Apr 17;47(1):163. doi: 10.1007/s10143-024-02411-2.

引用本文的文献

1
Advancing Heart Failure Care Through Disease Management Programs: A Comprehensive Framework to Improve Outcomes.通过疾病管理计划推进心力衰竭护理:改善预后的综合框架
J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2025 Aug 5;12(8):302. doi: 10.3390/jcdd12080302.
2
A predictive model for readmission within 1-year post-discharge in patients with schizophrenia.精神分裂症患者出院后 1 年内再入院的预测模型。
BMC Psychiatry. 2024 Aug 22;24(1):573. doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-06024-3.
3
Thirty-Day Unplanned Hospital Readmissions in Patients With Cancer and the Impact of Social Determinants of Health: A Machine Learning Approach.
癌症患者 30 天内非计划性住院再入院情况及健康社会决定因素的影响:一种机器学习方法。
JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2023 Jul;7:e2200143. doi: 10.1200/CCI.22.00143.