Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The Surprise Question and clinician-predicted prognosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Gupta, Ankit; Burgess, Ruth; Drozd, Michael; Gierula, John; Witte, Klaus; Straw, Sam.
Affiliation
  • Gupta A; Leeds Institute of Medical Education, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
  • Burgess R; Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
  • Drozd M; Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
  • Gierula J; Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
  • Witte K; Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
  • Straw S; Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK s.straw@leeds.ac.uk.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38925876
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) I2=97.2%), specificity 0.69 ((0.63 to 0.74) I2=99.7%), positive predictive value 0.40 ((0.35 to 0.45) I2=99.4%), negative predictive value 0.89 ((0.87 to 0.91) I2=99.7%) and accuracy 0.71 ((0.68 to 0.75) I2=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.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: BMJ Support Palliat Care Year: 2024 Document type: Article Country of publication: United kingdom

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: BMJ Support Palliat Care Year: 2024 Document type: Article Country of publication: United kingdom