Prognostic value for mortality of the new FADOI-COMPLIMED score(s) in patients hospitalized in medical wards.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
27
12
2018
accepted:
01
07
2019
entrez:
25
7
2019
pubmed:
25
7
2019
medline:
26
2
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Recently we defined a user-friendly tool (FADOI-COMPLIMED scores-FCS) to assess complexity of patients hospitalized in medical wards. FCS-1 is an average between the Barthel Index and the Exton-Smith score, while FCS-2 is obtained by using the Charlson score. The aim of this paper is to assess the ability of the FCS to predict mortality in-hospital and after 1-3-6-12-months. In this perspective, we performed comparisons with the validated Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI). It is a multicenter, prospective observational study, enrolling patients aged over 40, suffering from at least two chronic diseases and consecutively admitted to Internal Medicine departments. For each patient, data from 13 questionnaires were collected. Survival follow-up was conducted at 1-3-6-12 months after discharge. The relationships between cumulative incidences of death with FCS were investigated with logistic regression analyses. ROC curve analyses were performed in order to compare the predictiveness of the logistic models based on FCS with respect to those with MPI taken as reference. A cohort of 541 patients was evaluated. A 10-point higher value for FCS-1 and FCS-2 leads to an increased risk of 1-year death equal to 25.0% and 27.1%, respectively. In case of in-hospital mortality, the relevant percentages were 63.1% and 15.3%. The logistic model based on FCS is significantly more predictive than the model based on MPI (which requires an almost doubled number of items) for all the time-points considered. Assessment of prognosis of patients has the potential to guide clinical decision-making and lead to better care. We propose a new, efficient and easy-to-use instrument based on FCS, which demonstrated a good predictive power for mortality in patients hospitalized in medical wards. This tool may be of interest for clinical practice, since it well balances feasibility (requiring the compilation of 34 items, taking around 10 minutes) and performance.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Recently we defined a user-friendly tool (FADOI-COMPLIMED scores-FCS) to assess complexity of patients hospitalized in medical wards. FCS-1 is an average between the Barthel Index and the Exton-Smith score, while FCS-2 is obtained by using the Charlson score. The aim of this paper is to assess the ability of the FCS to predict mortality in-hospital and after 1-3-6-12-months. In this perspective, we performed comparisons with the validated Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI).
METHODS
It is a multicenter, prospective observational study, enrolling patients aged over 40, suffering from at least two chronic diseases and consecutively admitted to Internal Medicine departments. For each patient, data from 13 questionnaires were collected. Survival follow-up was conducted at 1-3-6-12 months after discharge. The relationships between cumulative incidences of death with FCS were investigated with logistic regression analyses. ROC curve analyses were performed in order to compare the predictiveness of the logistic models based on FCS with respect to those with MPI taken as reference.
RESULTS
A cohort of 541 patients was evaluated. A 10-point higher value for FCS-1 and FCS-2 leads to an increased risk of 1-year death equal to 25.0% and 27.1%, respectively. In case of in-hospital mortality, the relevant percentages were 63.1% and 15.3%. The logistic model based on FCS is significantly more predictive than the model based on MPI (which requires an almost doubled number of items) for all the time-points considered.
CONCLUSIONS
Assessment of prognosis of patients has the potential to guide clinical decision-making and lead to better care. We propose a new, efficient and easy-to-use instrument based on FCS, which demonstrated a good predictive power for mortality in patients hospitalized in medical wards. This tool may be of interest for clinical practice, since it well balances feasibility (requiring the compilation of 34 items, taking around 10 minutes) and performance.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31339912
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219767
pii: PONE-D-18-36910
pmc: PMC6656348
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0219767Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 Apr;51(4):451-8
pubmed: 12657063
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012 Oct;60(10):1957-68
pubmed: 22994844
Rejuvenation Res. 2008 Feb;11(1):151-61
pubmed: 18173367
Am J Med. 2007 May;120(5):455-60
pubmed: 17466658
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007 Jul;62(7):722-7
pubmed: 17634318
JAMA. 2012 Jan 11;307(2):182-92
pubmed: 22235089
PLoS One. 2012;7(1):e29090
pubmed: 22247767
Thorax. 1996 Sep;51(9):894-902
pubmed: 8984699
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000 May;48(S1):S16-24
pubmed: 10809452
JAMA. 2001 Jun 20;285(23):2987-94
pubmed: 11410097
Rejuvenation Res. 2010 Aug;13(4):469-77
pubmed: 20586646
J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Nov;16(11):728-36
pubmed: 11722685
Lancet. 1985 May 25;1(8439):1204-6
pubmed: 2860399
JAMA. 2001 Jun 6;285(21):2750-6
pubmed: 11386931
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 16;13(4):e0195805
pubmed: 29659593
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2004 Mar;59(3):255-63
pubmed: 15031310
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007 Jun;55(6):935-40
pubmed: 17537097
Stat Med. 1996 Feb 28;15(4):361-87
pubmed: 8668867
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 1999 Mar;29(3):156-9
pubmed: 10225699
JAMA. 2003 May 14;289(18):2387-92
pubmed: 12746362
J Gen Intern Med. 2004 Oct;19(10):1027-33
pubmed: 15482555
Arch Intern Med. 1998 Nov 23;158(21):2389-95
pubmed: 9827791
Ann Intern Med. 1995 Feb 1;122(3):191-203
pubmed: 7810938
J Gen Intern Med. 2009 Oct;24(10):1115-22
pubmed: 19649678
Eur J Intern Med. 2011 Jun;22(3):311-7
pubmed: 21570654
PLoS Med. 2018 Mar 27;15(3):e1002543
pubmed: 29584726