tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
BMJ Open
. 2024 Mar 23;14(3):e075475.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075475. Prognostic factors and prediction models for hospitalisation and all-cause mortality in adults presenting to primary care with a lower respiratory tract infection: a systematic review
Merijn H Rijk[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Tamara N Platteel[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Teun M C van den Berg[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Geert-Jan Geersing[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Paul Little[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Frans H Rutten[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Maarten van Smeden[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 4 [/SUP], Roderick P Venekamp[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 2 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Objective: To identify and synthesise relevant existing prognostic factors (PF) and prediction models (PM) for hospitalisation and all-cause mortality within 90 days in primary care patients with acute lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI).
Design: Systematic review.
Methods: Systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were performed. All PF and PM studies on the risk of hospitalisation or all-cause mortality within 90 days in adult primary care LRTI patients were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool and Prediction Model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool tools for PF and PM studies, respectively. The results of included PF and PM studies were descriptively summarised.
Results: Of 2799 unique records identified, 16 were included: 9 PF studies, 6 PM studies and 1 combination of both. The risk of bias was judged high for all studies, mainly due to limitations in the analysis domain. Based on reported multivariable associations in PF studies, increasing age, sex, current smoking, diabetes, a history of stroke, cancer or heart failure, previous hospitalisation, influenza vaccination (negative association), current use of systemic corticosteroids, recent antibiotic use, respiratory rate ≥25/min and diagnosis of pneumonia were identified as most promising candidate predictors. One newly developed PM was externally validated (c statistic 0.74, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.78) whereas the previously hospital-derived CRB-65 was externally validated in primary care in five studies (c statistic ranging from 0.72 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.81) to 0.79 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.92)). None of the PM studies reported measures of model calibration.
Conclusions: Implementation of existing models for individualised risk prediction of 90-day hospitalisation or mortality in primary care LRTI patients in everyday practice is hampered by incomplete assessment of model performance. The identified candidate predictors provide useful information for clinicians and warrant consideration when developing or updating PMs using state-of-the-art development and validation techniques.
Prospero registration number: CRD42022341233.
Keywords: Primary Care; Prognosis; Respiratory infections; Systematic Review.
. 2024 Mar 23;14(3):e075475.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075475. Prognostic factors and prediction models for hospitalisation and all-cause mortality in adults presenting to primary care with a lower respiratory tract infection: a systematic review
Merijn H Rijk[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Tamara N Platteel[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Teun M C van den Berg[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Geert-Jan Geersing[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Paul Little[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Frans H Rutten[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Maarten van Smeden[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 4 [/SUP], Roderick P Venekamp[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 2 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 38521534
- PMCID: PMC10961536
- DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075475
Objective: To identify and synthesise relevant existing prognostic factors (PF) and prediction models (PM) for hospitalisation and all-cause mortality within 90 days in primary care patients with acute lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI).
Design: Systematic review.
Methods: Systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were performed. All PF and PM studies on the risk of hospitalisation or all-cause mortality within 90 days in adult primary care LRTI patients were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool and Prediction Model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool tools for PF and PM studies, respectively. The results of included PF and PM studies were descriptively summarised.
Results: Of 2799 unique records identified, 16 were included: 9 PF studies, 6 PM studies and 1 combination of both. The risk of bias was judged high for all studies, mainly due to limitations in the analysis domain. Based on reported multivariable associations in PF studies, increasing age, sex, current smoking, diabetes, a history of stroke, cancer or heart failure, previous hospitalisation, influenza vaccination (negative association), current use of systemic corticosteroids, recent antibiotic use, respiratory rate ≥25/min and diagnosis of pneumonia were identified as most promising candidate predictors. One newly developed PM was externally validated (c statistic 0.74, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.78) whereas the previously hospital-derived CRB-65 was externally validated in primary care in five studies (c statistic ranging from 0.72 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.81) to 0.79 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.92)). None of the PM studies reported measures of model calibration.
Conclusions: Implementation of existing models for individualised risk prediction of 90-day hospitalisation or mortality in primary care LRTI patients in everyday practice is hampered by incomplete assessment of model performance. The identified candidate predictors provide useful information for clinicians and warrant consideration when developing or updating PMs using state-of-the-art development and validation techniques.
Prospero registration number: CRD42022341233.
Keywords: Primary Care; Prognosis; Respiratory infections; Systematic Review.