The "surprise question" for predicting death in seriously ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:264
作者
Downar, James [1 ,2 ]
Goldman, Russell [3 ]
Pinto, Ruxandra [4 ]
Englesakis, Marina [5 ]
Adhikari, Neill K. J. [6 ,7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Univ Hlth Network, Div Respirol Crit Care & Palliat Care, Sinai Hlth Syst, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Sinai Hlth Syst, Temmy Latner Ctr Palliat Care, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Sinai Hlth Syst, Temmy Latner Ctr Palliat Care, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Toronto, Sunnybrook Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Crit Care Med, Toronto, ON, Canada
[5] Univ Toronto, Toronto Gen Hosp, Univ Hlth Network, Lib & Informat Serv, Toronto, ON, Canada
[6] Univ Toronto, Dept Crit Care Med, Toronto, ON, Canada
[7] Univ Toronto, Sunnybrook Res Inst, Sunnybrook Hlth Sci Ctr, Toronto, ON, Canada
[8] Univ Toronto, Interdept Div Crit Care, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
DIAGNOSTIC-TEST ACCURACY; EARLY PALLIATIVE CARE; ADVANCED CANCER; MORTALITY RISK; PROGNOSTIC-SIGNIFICANCE; GENERAL-POPULATION; DIALYSIS PATIENTS; HEMODIALYSIS; NEED; PREVALENCE;
D O I
10.1503/cmaj.160775
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: The surprise question Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next 12 months? has been used to identify patients at high risk of death who might benefit from palliative care services. Our objective was to systematically review the performance characteristics of the surprise question in predicting death. METHODS: We searched multiple electronic databases from inception to 2016 to identify studies that prospectively screened patients with the surprise question and reported on death at 6 to 18 months. We constructed models of hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristics (sROCs) to determine prognostic performance. RESULTS: Sixteen studies (17 cohorts, 11 621 patients) met the selection criteria. For the outcome of death at 6 to 18 months, the pooled prognostic characteristics were sensitivity 67.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 55.7%-76.7%), specificity 80.2% (73.3%-85.6%), positive likelihood ratio 3.4 (95% CI 2.8-4.1), negative likelihood ratio 0.41 (95% CI 0.32-0.54), positive predictive value 37.1% (95% CI 30.2%-44.6%) and negative predictive value 93.1% (95% CI 91.0%-94.8%). The surprise question had worse discrimination in patients with noncancer illness (area under sROC curve 0.77 [95% CI 0.73-0.81]) than in patients with cancer (area under sROC curve 0.83 [95% CI 0.79-0.87; p = 0.02 for difference]). Most studies had a moderate to high risk of bias, often because they had a low or unknown participation rate or had missing data. INTERPRETATION: The surprise question performs poorly to modestly as a predictive tool for death, with worse performance in noncancer illness. Further studies are needed to develop accurate tools to identify patients with palliative care needs and to assess the surprise question for this purpose.
引用
收藏
页码:E484 / E493
页数:10
相关论文
共 54 条
  • [1] Abell JM, 2014, J PALLIAT MED, V17, pA21
  • [2] Nephrologist-Facilitated Advance Care Planning for Hemodialysis Patients: A Quality Improvement Project
    Amro, Osama W.
    Ramasamy, Malar
    Strom, James A.
    Weiner, Daniel E.
    Jaber, Bertrand L.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF KIDNEY DISEASES, 2016, 68 (01) : 103 - 109
  • [3] Predicting mortality among a general practice-based sample of older people with heart failure
    Barnes, Sarah
    Gott, Merryn
    Payne, Sheila
    Parker, Chris
    Seamark, David
    Gariballa, Salah
    Small, Neil
    [J]. CHRONIC ILLNESS, 2008, 4 (01) : 5 - 12
  • [4] Strategic Targeting of Advance Care Planning Interventions The Goldilocks Phenomenon
    Billings, J. Andrew
    Bernacki, Rachelle
    [J]. JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2014, 174 (04) : 620 - 624
  • [5] Boyd Kirsty, 2015, Clin Liver Dis (Hoboken), V6, P15, DOI 10.1002/cld.479
  • [6] How good is that agreement?
    Byrt, T
    [J]. EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1996, 7 (05) : 561 - 561
  • [7] Improving care for patients whose recovery is uncertain. The AMBER care bundle: design and implementation
    Carey, Irene
    Shouls, Susanna
    Bristowe, Katherine
    Morris, Michelle
    Briant, Linda
    Robinson, Carole
    Caulkin, Ruth
    Griffiths, Mathew
    Clark, Kieron
    Koffman, Jonathan
    Hopper, Adrian
    [J]. BMJ SUPPORTIVE & PALLIATIVE CARE, 2015, 5 (01) : 12 - 18
  • [8] Extent and determinants of error in doctors' prognoses in terminally ill patients: prospective cohort study
    Christakis, NA
    Lamont, EB
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7233) : 469 - 472
  • [9] Predicting Six-Month Mortality for Patients Who Are on Maintenance Hemodialysis
    Cohen, Lewis M.
    Ruthazer, Robin
    Moss, Alvin H.
    Germain, Michael J.
    [J]. CLINICAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY, 2010, 5 (01): : 72 - 79
  • [10] The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed
    Deeks, JJ
    Macaskill, P
    Irwig, L
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2005, 58 (09) : 882 - 893