Suppr超能文献

意外问题与临床医生预测的预后:系统评价与荟萃分析

The Surprise Question and clinician-predicted prognosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Gupta Ankit, Burgess Ruth, Drozd Michael, Gierula John, Witte Klaus, Straw Sam

机构信息

Leeds Institute of Medical Education, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2024 Dec 25;15(1):12-35. doi: 10.1136/spcare-2024-004879.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Surprise Question, 'Would you be surprised if this person died within the next year?' is a simple tool that can be used by clinicians to identify people within the last year of life. This review aimed to determine the accuracy of this assessment, across different healthcare settings, specialties, follow-up periods and respondents.

METHODS

Searches were conducted of Medline, Embase, AMED, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception until 01 January 2024. Studies were included if they reported original data on the ability of the Surprise Question to predict survival. For each study (including subgroups), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and accuracy were determined.

RESULTS

Our dataset comprised 56 distinct cohorts, including 68 829 patients. In a pooled analysis, the sensitivity of the Surprise Question was 0.69 ((0.64 to 0.74) I=97.2%), specificity 0.69 ((0.63 to 0.74) I=99.7%), positive predictive value 0.40 ((0.35 to 0.45) I=99.4%), negative predictive value 0.89 ((0.87 to 0.91) I=99.7%) and accuracy 0.71 ((0.68 to 0.75) I=99.3%). The prompt performed best in populations with high event rates, shorter timeframes and when posed to more experienced respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

The Surprise Question demonstrated modest accuracy with considerable heterogeneity across the population to which it was applied and to whom it was posed. Prospective studies should test whether the prompt can facilitate timely access to palliative care services, as originally envisioned.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD32022298236.

摘要

背景

“意外问题”,即“如果此人在接下来的一年里去世,你会感到意外吗?”是一种简单的工具,临床医生可用于识别处于生命最后一年的患者。本综述旨在确定该评估在不同医疗环境、专业、随访期和受访者中的准确性。

方法

检索了Medline、Embase、AMED、PubMed和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库,检索时间从建库至2024年1月1日。纳入报告了关于“意外问题”预测生存能力的原始数据的研究。对每项研究(包括亚组)确定敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值以及准确性。

结果

我们的数据集包括56个不同队列,共68829名患者。在汇总分析中,“意外问题”的敏感性为0.69((0.64至0.74)I = 97.2%),特异性为0.69((0.63至0.74)I = 99.7%),阳性预测值为0.40((0.35至0.45)I = 99.4%),阴性预测值为0.89((0.87至0.91)I = 99.7%),准确性为0.71((0.68至0.75)I = 99.3%)。该提示在事件发生率高、时间框架较短以及向经验更丰富的受访者提出时表现最佳。

结论

“意外问题”显示出适度的准确性,但在应用对象和提出问题的对象群体中存在相当大的异质性。前瞻性研究应测试该提示是否能如最初设想的那样促进及时获得姑息治疗服务。

PROSPERO注册号:CRD32022298236。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/372d/11874281/f206933802ed/spcare-15-1-g001.jpg

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