Clinician Prediction of Survival vs Calculated Prediction Scores in Patients Requiring Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

Author:

Martin Laura Ann,Bojorquez Genesis R.,Yi Cassia,Ignatyev Alex,Pollema Travis,Davidson Judy E.,Odish Mazen

Abstract

Background Determining appropriate extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) candidacy ensures appropriate utilization of this costly resource. The current ECMO survival prediction scores do not consider clinician assessment of patient viability. This study compared clinician prediction of survival to hospital discharge versus prediction scores. Objectives The aim of this study was to compare clinician prediction of patients' survival to hospital discharge versus prognostic prediction scores (Respiratory ECMO Survival Prediction [RESP] or Survival After Veno-Arterial ECMO [SAVE] score) to actual survival. Methods This was an observational descriptive study from January 2020 to November 2021 conducted with interviews of nurses, perfusionists, and physicians who were involved during the initiation of ECMO within the first 24 hours of cannulation. Data were retrieved from the medical record to determine prediction scores and survival outcomes at hospital discharge. Accuracy of clinician prediction of survival was compared to the RESP or SAVE prediction scores and actual survival to hospital discharge. Results Accurate prediction of survival to hospital discharge for veno-venous ECMO by nurses was 47%, 64% by perfusionists, 45% by physicians, and 45% by the RESP score. Accurate predictions of patients on veno-arterial ECMO were correct in 54% of nurses, 77% of physicians, and 14% by the SAVE score. Physicians were more accurate than the SAVE score, P = .021, and perfusionists were significantly more accurate than the RESP score, P = .044. There was no relationship between ECMO specialists' years of experience and accuracy of predications. Conclusion Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation clinicians may have better predictions of survival to hospital discharge than the prediction scores. Further research is needed to develop accurate prediction tools to help determine ECMO eligibility.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Reference15 articles.

1. Extracorporeal life support for adults with respiratory failure and related indications: a review;JAMA,2019

2. U.S. And international in-hospital costs of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a systematic review;Appl Health Econ Health Policy,2015

3. The Southern California extracorporeal membrane oxygenation consortium during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic;Disaster Med Public Health Prep,2021

4. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during respiratory pandemics: past, present, and future;Am J Respir Crit Care Med,2022

5. Predictive models in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO): a systematic review;Syst Rev,2023

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3