Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Which Models Can I Use to Predict Adult ICU Length of Stay? A Systematic Review.
Verburg, Ilona Willempje Maria; Atashi, Alireza; Eslami, Saeid; Holman, Rebecca; Abu-Hanna, Ameen; de Jonge, Everet; Peek, Niels; de Keizer, Nicolette Fransisca.
Afiliação
  • Verburg IW; 1Department of Medical Informatics, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2Student Research Committee, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. 3Cancer Informatics Department, Breast Cancer Research Center, ACECR, Tehran, Iran. 4Pharmaceutical Research Center, School of Pharmacy, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. 5Department of Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
Crit Care Med ; 45(2): e222-e231, 2017 Feb.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27768612
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

We systematically reviewed models to predict adult ICU length of stay. DATA SOURCES We searched the Ovid EMBASE and MEDLINE databases for studies on the development or validation of ICU length of stay prediction models. STUDY SELECTION We identified 11 studies describing the development of 31 prediction models and three describing external validation of one of these models. DATA EXTRACTION Clinicians use ICU length of stay predictions for planning ICU capacity, identifying unexpectedly long ICU length of stay, and benchmarking ICUs. We required the model variables to have been published and for the models to be free of organizational characteristics and to produce accurate predictions, as assessed by R across patients for planning and identifying unexpectedly long ICU length of stay and across ICUs for benchmarking, with low calibration bias. We assessed the reporting quality using the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies. DATA

SYNTHESIS:

The number of admissions ranged from 253 to 178,503. Median ICU length of stay was between 2 and 6.9 days. Two studies had not published model variables and three included organizational characteristics. None of the models produced predictions with low bias. The R was 0.05-0.28 across patients and 0.01-0.64 across ICUs. The reporting scores ranged from 49 of 78 to 60 of 78 and the methodologic scores from 12 of 22 to 16 of 22.

CONCLUSION:

No models completely satisfy our requirements for planning, identifying unexpectedly long ICU length of stay, or for benchmarking purposes. Physicians using these models to predict ICU length of stay should interpret them with reservation.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Unidades de Terapia Intensiva / Tempo de Internação Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Crit Care Med Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Irã

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Unidades de Terapia Intensiva / Tempo de Internação Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Crit Care Med Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Irã