Suppr超能文献

卒中量表的相互转换。对治疗试验的影响。

Interconversion of stroke scales. Implications for therapeutic trials.

作者信息

Muir K W, Grosset D G, Lees K R

机构信息

University Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Gardiner Institute, Western Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland.

出版信息

Stroke. 1994 Jul;25(7):1366-70. doi: 10.1161/01.str.25.7.1366.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Stroke scales are intended to measure stroke severity for the purpose of clinical trials. Scores have been used to determine trial entry, to compare patient groups within or between trials, or as a secondary end point. The use of scores as an end point in meta-analysis has not been validated, but such analyses have nevertheless been performed when equivocal results have been obtained using the main outcome measure. The different scale designs suggest that conversion of scores may not be possible. We sought to determine whether scores on different scales could be interconverted.

METHODS

A single observer scored 433 consecutive admissions to an acute stroke unit on the Canadian Neurological Scale, the middle cerebral artery Neurological Score (or Orgogozo scale), and the National Institutes of Health stroke scale. Data were separated into training and test sets, and linear regression was used to model conversion between scales. Prediction errors were calculated. Strokes were subdivided according to the Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project classification, and coefficients of determination were calculated for different subtypes.

RESULTS

Conversion between Canadian and middle cerebral artery Neurological scales was satisfactory (R2 = 94.7%), and prediction errors were acceptable (absolute prediction error, 5.0 +/- 5). Conversion from the National Institutes of Health scale was worse (R2 = 87.5% to Canadian and 89.0% to Neurological Score), and prediction errors were significantly greater (Neurological Score error, 8.7 +/- 7; Canadian Neurological Scale error, 8.5 +/- 7.3; P < .005 for both). Coefficients of determination for interconversion were significantly worse for dysphasic patients with total anterior circulation strokes than for other stroke types (P < .01). Reweighting the motor component of the National Institutes of Health scale improved coefficients of determination and reduced prediction errors, but prediction error for conversion to the Canadian scale remained significantly greater than other conversions (P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The Canadian Neurological Scale and the middle cerebral artery Neurological Score may reliably be converted. The National Institutes of Health scale cannot be used to predict these scores reliably, even with reweighting of the motor score. Interconversion is poorest for patients with dysphasia and total anterior circulation strokes. These results suggest that there will be more general difficulty in interconverting scales that use different test items and weighting. Meta-analysis using sequential changes in averaged scores from various stroke scales is not valid.

摘要

背景与目的

卒中量表旨在为临床试验测量卒中严重程度。分数已被用于确定试验入选标准、比较试验内或试验间的患者组,或作为次要终点。在荟萃分析中使用分数作为终点尚未得到验证,但当使用主要结局指标得到不明确结果时,仍进行了此类分析。不同的量表设计表明分数可能无法转换。我们试图确定不同量表的分数是否可以相互转换。

方法

一名观察者对433例连续入住急性卒中单元的患者进行加拿大神经量表、大脑中动脉神经评分(或奥尔戈佐量表)和美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表评分。数据分为训练集和测试集,采用线性回归对量表间的转换进行建模。计算预测误差。根据牛津郡社区卒中项目分类对卒中进行细分,并计算不同亚型的决定系数。

结果

加拿大神经量表与大脑中动脉神经量表之间的转换效果良好(R2 = 94.7%),预测误差可接受(绝对预测误差,5.0±5)。从美国国立卫生研究院量表进行的转换效果较差(转换为加拿大神经量表时R2 = 87.5%,转换为神经评分时R2 = 89.0%),预测误差明显更大(神经评分误差,8.7±7;加拿大神经量表误差,8.5±7.3;两者P <.005)。与其他卒中类型相比,完全前循环卒中的失语患者相互转换的决定系数明显更差(P <.01)。对美国国立卫生研究院量表的运动部分重新加权可提高决定系数并减少预测误差,但转换为加拿大神经量表的预测误差仍明显大于其他转换(P =.001)。

结论

加拿大神经量表和大脑中动脉神经评分可能可以可靠地相互转换。即使对运动评分进行重新加权,美国国立卫生研究院量表也不能可靠地用于预测这些分数。对于失语和完全前循环卒中患者,相互转换效果最差。这些结果表明,在使用不同测试项目和权重的量表之间进行相互转换会存在更普遍的困难。使用各种卒中量表平均分数的连续变化进行荟萃分析是无效的。

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