Dataset Information

Predicting surgical resource consumption and in-hospital mortality in resource-scarce conflict settings: a retrospective study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In armed conflicts, civilian health care struggles to cope. Being able to predict what resources are needed is therefore vital. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) implemented in the 1990s the Red Cross Wound Score (RCWS) for assessment of penetrating injuries. It is unknown to what extent RCWS or the established trauma scores Kampala trauma Score (KTS) and revised trauma score (RTS) can be used to predict surgical resource consumption and in-hospital mortality in resource-scarce conflict settings.

Methods

A retrospective study of routinely collected data on weapon-injured adults admitted to ICRC's hospitals in Peshawar, 2009-2012 and Goma, 2012-2014. High resource consumption was defined as ≥3 surgical procedures or ≥ 3 blood-transfusions or amputation. The relationship between RCWS, KTS, RTS and resource consumption, in-hospital mortality was evaluated with logistic regression and adjusted area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). The impact of missing data was assessed with imputation. Model fit was compared with Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).

Results

A total of 1564 patients were included, of these 834 patients had complete data. For high surgical resource consumption AUC was significantly higher for RCWS (0.76, 95% CI 0.74-0.78) than for KTS (0.53, 95% CI 0.50-0.56) and RTS (0.51, 95% CI 0.48-0.54) for all patients. Additionally, RCWS had lower AIC, indicating a better model fit. For in-hospital mortality AUC was significantly higher for RCWS (0.83, 95% CI 0.79-0.88) than for KTS (0.71, 95% CI 0.65-0.76) and RTS (0.70, 95% CI 0.63-0.76) for all patients, but not for patients with complete data.

Conclusion

RCWS appears to predict surgical resource consumption better than KTS and RTS. RCWS may be a promising tool for planning and monitoring surgical care in resource-scarce conflict settings.

SUBMITTER: Muhrbeck M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8359038 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn an external validation study, model recalibration is suggested once there is evidence of poor model calibration but with acceptable discriminatory abilities. We identified four models, namely RISC-Malawi (Respiratory Index of Severity in Children) developed in Malawi, and three other predictive models developed in Uganda by Lowlaavar et al. (2016). These prognostic models exhibited poor calibration performance in the recent external validation study, hence the need for recalibration.ObjectiveIn this study, we aim to recalibrate these models using regression coefficients updating strategy and determine how much their performances improve.MethodsWe used data collected by the Clinical Information Network from paediatric wards of 20 public county referral hospitals. Missing data were multiply imputed using chained equations. Model updating entailed adjustment of the model's calibration performance while the discriminatory ability remained unaltered. We used two strategies to adjust the model: intercept-only and the logistic recalibration method.ResultsEligibility criteria for the RISC-Malawi model were met in 50,669 patients, split into two sets: a model-recalibrating set (n = 30,343) and a test set (n = 20,326). For the Lowlaavar models, 10,782 patients met the eligibility criteria, of whom 6175 were used to recalibrate the models and 4607 were used to test the performance of the adjusted model. The intercept of the recalibrated RISC-Malawi model was 0.12 (95% CI 0.07, 0.17), while the slope of the same model was 1.08 (95% CI 1.03, 1.13). The performance of the recalibrated models on the test set suggested that no model met the threshold of a perfectly calibrated model, which includes a calibration slope of 1 and a calibration-in-the-large/intercept of 0.ConclusionsEven after model adjustment, the calibration performances of the 4 models did not meet the recommended threshold for perfect calibration. This finding is suggestive of models over/underestimating the predicted risk of in-hospital mortality, potentially harmful clinically. Therefore, researchers may consider other alternatives, such as ensemble techniques to combine these models into a meta-model to improve out-of-sample predictive performance.

Project description:The rapid emergence and spread of numerous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants across the globe underscores the crucial need for continuous SARS-CoV-2 surveillance to ensure that potentially more pathogenic variants are detected early and contained. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) is currently the gold standard for COVID-19 surveillance; however, it remains cost-prohibitive and requires specialized technical skills. To increase surveillance capacity, especially in resource-scarce settings, supplementary methods that are cost- and time-effective are needed. Real-time multiplex PCR genotyping assays offer an economical and fast solution for screening circulating and emerging variants while simultaneously complementing existing WGS approaches. In this study we evaluated the AllplexTM SARS-CoV-2 Variants II multiplex real-time PCR genotyping assay, Seegene (South Korea), and implemented it in retrospectively characterizing circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants in a rural South African setting between April and October 2021, prior to the emergence of the Omicron variant in South Africa. The AllplexTM SARS-CoV-2 Variants II real-time PCR assay demonstrated perfect concordance with whole-genome sequencing in detecting Beta and Delta variants and exhibited high specificity, sensitivity and reproducibility. Implementation of the assay in characterization of SARS-CoV-2 variants between April and October 2021 in a rural South African setting revealed a rapid shift from the Beta to the Delta variant between April and June. All specimens successfully genotyped in April were Beta variants and the Delta variant was not detected until May. By June, 78% of samples genotyped were Delta variants and in July >95% of all genotyped samples were Delta variants. The Delta variant continued to predominate through to the end of our analysis in October 2021. Taken together, a commercial SARS-CoV-2 variant genotyping assay detected the rapid rate at which the Delta variant displaced the Beta variant in Limpopo, an under-monitored province in South Africa. Such assays provide a quick and cost-effective method of monitoring circulating variants and should be used to complement genomic sequencing for COVID-19 surveillance especially in resource-scarce settings.

Project description:ImportanceThe overwhelming majority of fetal and neonatal deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. Fetal and neonatal risk assessment tools may be useful to predict the risk of death.ObjectiveTo develop risk prediction models for intrapartum stillbirth and neonatal death.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used data from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Global Network for Women's and Children's Health Research population-based vital registry, including clinical sites in South Asia (India and Pakistan), Africa (Democratic Republic of Congo, Zambia, and Kenya), and Latin America (Guatemala). A total of 502 648 pregnancies were prospectively enrolled in the registry.ExposuresRisk factors were added sequentially into the data set in 4 scenarios: (1) prenatal, (2) predelivery, (3) delivery and day 1, and (4) postdelivery through day 2.Main outcomes and measuresData sets were randomly divided into 10 groups of 3 analysis data sets including training (60%), test (20%), and validation (20%). Conventional and advanced machine learning modeling techniques were applied to assess predictive abilities using area under the curve (AUC) for intrapartum stillbirth and neonatal mortality.ResultsAll prenatal and predelivery models had predictive accuracy for both intrapartum stillbirth and neonatal mortality with AUC values 0.71 or less. Five of 6 models for neonatal mortality based on delivery/day 1 and postdelivery/day 2 had increased predictive accuracy with AUC values greater than 0.80. Birth weight was the most important predictor for neonatal death in both postdelivery scenarios with independent predictive ability with AUC values of 0.78 and 0.76, respectively. The addition of 4 other top predictors increased AUC to 0.83 and 0.87 for the postdelivery scenarios, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceModels based on prenatal or predelivery data had predictive accuracy for intrapartum stillbirths and neonatal mortality of AUC values 0.71 or less. Models that incorporated delivery data had good predictive accuracy for risk of neonatal mortality. Birth weight was the most important predictor for neonatal mortality.