Emergency Medicine, Amsterdam UMC Locatie AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Anaesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC Locatie AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Emerg Med J. 2022 Dec;39(12):918-923. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2021-211524. Epub 2022 Aug 9.
Risk stratification is increasingly based on Early Warning Score (EWS)-based models, instead of clinical judgement. However, it is unknown how risk-stratification models and EWS perform as compared with the clinical judgement of treating acute healthcare providers. Therefore, we performed a systematic review of all available literature evaluating clinical judgement of healthcare providers to the use of risk-stratification models in predicting patients' clinical outcome.
Studies comparing clinical judgement and risk-stratification models in predicting outcomes in adult patients presenting at the ED were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes included the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission; severe adverse events; clinical deterioration and mortality. Risk of bias among the included studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool.
Six studies (6419 participants) were included of which 4 studies were judged to be at high risk of bias. Only descriptive analysis was performed as a meta-analysis was not possible due to few included studies and high clinical heterogeneity. The performance of clinical judgement and risk-stratification models were both moderate in predicting mortality, deterioration and need for ICU admission with area under the curves between 0.70 and 0.89. The performance of clinical judgement did not significantly differ from risk-stratification models in predicting mortality (n=2 studies) or deterioration (n=1 study). However, clinical judgement of healthcare providers was significantly better in predicting the need for ICU admission (n=2) and severe adverse events (n=1 study) as compared with risk-stratification models.
Based on limited existing data, clinical judgement has greater accuracy in predicting the need for ICU admission and the occurrence of severe adverse events compared with risk-stratification models in ED patients. However, performance is similar in predicting mortality and deterioration.
CRD42020218893.
风险分层越来越基于基于早期预警评分(EWS)的模型,而不是临床判断。然而,目前尚不清楚风险分层模型和 EWS 与急性医疗保健提供者的临床判断相比表现如何。因此,我们对所有评估医疗保健提供者临床判断用于预测患者临床结局的风险分层模型的可用文献进行了系统回顾。
纳入比较 ED 就诊成人患者临床判断与风险分层模型预测结局的研究。结局包括需要入住重症监护病房(ICU);严重不良事件;临床恶化和死亡。使用诊断准确性研究质量评估工具 2(QUADAS-2)评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。
纳入了 6 项研究(6419 名参与者),其中 4 项研究被认为存在高偏倚风险。由于纳入研究数量较少且临床异质性较高,仅进行了描述性分析,无法进行荟萃分析。临床判断和风险分层模型在预测死亡率、恶化和 ICU 入住需求方面的表现均为中度,曲线下面积在 0.70 至 0.89 之间。临床判断和风险分层模型在预测死亡率(n=2 项研究)或恶化(n=1 项研究)方面的性能没有显著差异。然而,与风险分层模型相比,医疗保健提供者的临床判断在预测 ICU 入住需求(n=2 项研究)和严重不良事件(n=1 项研究)方面的准确性显著更高。
基于有限的现有数据,与风险分层模型相比,临床判断在预测 ED 患者 ICU 入住需求和严重不良事件发生方面具有更高的准确性。然而,在预测死亡率和恶化方面,两者的性能相似。
PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42020218893。