Validation of a COVID-19 self-assessment tool for the prediction of COVID-19 in a primary health care setting in Egypt.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
As SARS-CoV-2 infection is sweeping the globe, early identification and timely management of infected patients will alleviate unmet health care demands and ultimately control of the disease. Remote COVID-19 self-assessment tools will offer a potential strategy for patient guidance on medical consultation versus home care without requiring direct attention from healthcare professionals.Objective(s)
This study aimed to assess the validity and interrater reliability of the initial and modified versions of a COVID-19 self-assessment prediction tool introduced by the Egyptian Ministry of Health and Population (MoHP) early in the epidemic. The scoring tool was released for the public through media outlets for remote self-assessment of SARS-CoV-2 infection connecting patients with the appropriate level of care.Methods
We evaluated the initial score in the analysis of 818 consecutive cases presenting with symptoms suggesting COVID-19 in a single-primary health care clinic in Alexandria during the epidemic in Egypt (mid-February through July). Validity parameters, interrater agreement and accuracy of the score as a triage tool were calculated versus the COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test.Results
A total of 818 patients reporting symptoms potentially attributable to COVID-19 were enrolled. The initial tool correctly identified 296 of 390 COVID-19 PCR +ve cases (sensitivity = 75.9%, specificity = 42.3%, positive predictive value = 54.5%, negative predictive value = 65.8%). The modified versions of the MoHP triage score yielded comparable results albeit with a better accuracy during the late epidemic phase. Recent history of travel [OR (95% CI) = 12.1 (5.0-29.4)] and being a health care worker [OR (95% CI) = 5.8 (2.8-11.9)] were major predictors of SARS-CoV-2 infection in early and late epidemic phases, respectively. On the other hand, direct contact with a respiratory infection case increased the risk of infection by three folds throughout the epidemic period.Conclusion
The tested score has a sufficient predictive value and potential as a triage tool in primary health care settings. Updated implementation of this home-grown tool will improve COVID-19 response at the primary health care level.
SUBMITTER: Abd El-Wahab EW
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8628560 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAccurate assessment of COVID-19 severity in the community is essential for patient care and requires COVID-19-specific risk prediction scores adequately validated in a community setting. Following a qualitative phase to identify signs, symptoms, and risk factors, we aimed to develop and validate two COVID-19-specific risk prediction scores. Remote COVID-19 Assessment in Primary Care-General Practice score (RECAP-GP; without peripheral oxygen saturation [SpO2]) and RECAP-oxygen saturation score (RECAP-O2; with SpO2).MethodsRECAP was a prospective cohort study that used multivariable logistic regression. Data on signs and symptoms (predictors) of disease were collected from community-based patients with suspected COVID-19 via primary care electronic health records and linked with secondary data on hospital admission (outcome) within 28 days of symptom onset. Data sources for RECAP-GP were Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre (RCGP-RSC) primary care practices (development set), northwest London primary care practices (validation set), and the NHS COVID-19 Clinical Assessment Service (CCAS; validation set). The data source for RECAP-O2 was the Doctaly Assist platform (development set and validation set in subsequent sample). The two probabilistic risk prediction models were built by backwards elimination using the development sets and validated by application to the validation datasets. Estimated sample size per model, including the development and validation sets was 2880 people.FindingsData were available from 8311 individuals. Observations, such as SpO2, were mostly missing in the northwest London, RCGP-RSC, and CCAS data; however, SpO2 was available for 1364 (70·0%) of 1948 patients who used Doctaly. In the final predictive models, RECAP-GP (n=1863) included sex (male and female), age (years), degree of breathlessness (three point scale), temperature symptoms (two point scale), and presence of hypertension (yes or no); the area under the curve was 0·80 (95% CI 0·76-0·85) and on validation the negative predictive value of a low risk designation was 99% (95% CI 98·1-99·2; 1435 of 1453). RECAP-O2 included age (years), degree of breathlessness (two point scale), fatigue (two point scale), and SpO2 at rest (as a percentage); the area under the curve was 0·84 (0·78-0·90) and on validation the negative predictive value of low risk designation was 99% (95% CI 98·9-99·7; 1176 of 1183).InterpretationBoth RECAP models are valid tools to assess COVID-19 patients in the community. RECAP-GP can be used initially, without need for observations, to identify patients who require monitoring. If the patient is monitored and SpO2 is available, RECAP-O2 is useful to assess the need for treatment escalation.FundingCommunity Jameel and the Imperial College President's Excellence Fund, the Economic and Social Research Council, UK Research and Innovation, and Health Data Research UK.
| S-EPMC9333950 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo develop: (1) two validated risk prediction models for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) positivity using readily available parameters in a general hospital setting; (2) nomograms and probabilities to allow clinical utilisation.MethodsPatients with and without COVID-19 were included from 4 Hong Kong hospitals. The database was randomly split into 2:1: for model development database (n = 895) and validation database (n = 435). Multivariable logistic regression was utilised for model creation and validated with the Hosmer-Lemeshow (H-L) test and calibration plot. Nomograms and probabilities set at 0.1, 0.2, 0.4 and 0.6 were calculated to determine sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).ResultsA total of 1330 patients (mean age 58.2 ± 24.5 years; 50.7% males; 296 COVID-19 positive) were recruited. The first prediction model developed had age, total white blood cell count, chest x-ray appearances and contact history as significant predictors (AUC = 0.911 [CI = 0.880-0.941]). The second model developed has the same variables except contact history (AUC = 0.880 [CI = 0.844-0.916]). Both were externally validated on the H-L test (p = 0.781 and 0.155, respectively) and calibration plot. Models were converted to nomograms. Lower probabilities give higher sensitivity and NPV; higher probabilities give higher specificity and PPV.ConclusionTwo simple-to-use validated nomograms were developed with excellent AUCs based on readily available parameters and can be considered for clinical utilisation.
| S-EPMC7491462 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To adapt the consumer version of the Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT) for Vietnam and determine its internal consistency and validity.A quantitative cross sectional study.56 communes in 3 representative provinces of central Vietnam.Total of 3289 people who used health care services at health facility at least once over the past two years.The Vietnamese adult expanded consumer version of the PCAT (VN PCAT-AE) is an instrument for evaluation of primary care in Vietnam with 70 items comprising six scales representing four core primary care domains, and three additional scales representing three derivative domains. Sixteen other items from the original tool were not included in the final instrument, due to problems with missing values, floor or ceiling effects, and item-total correlations. All the retained scales have a Cronbach's alpha above 0.70 except for the subscale of Family Centeredness.The VN PCAT-AE demonstrates adequate internal consistency and validity to be used as an effective tool for measuring the quality of primary care in Vietnam from the consumer perspective. Additional work in the future to optimize valid measurement in all domains consistent with the original version of the tool may be helpful as the primary care system in Vietnam further develops.
| S-EPMC5764365 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundDuring the pandemic, remote consultations have become the norm for assessing patients with signs and symptoms of COVID-19 to decrease the risk of transmission. This has intensified the clinical uncertainty already experienced by primary care clinicians when assessing patients with suspected COVID-19 and has prompted the use of risk prediction scores, such as the National Early Warning Score (NEWS2), to assess severity and guide treatment. However, the risk prediction tools available have not been validated in a community setting and are not designed to capture the idiosyncrasies of COVID-19 infection.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to produce a multivariate risk prediction tool, RECAP-V1 (Remote COVID-19 Assessment in Primary Care), to support primary care clinicians in the identification of those patients with COVID-19 that are at higher risk of deterioration and facilitate the early escalation of their treatment with the aim of improving patient outcomes.MethodsThe study follows a prospective cohort observational design, whereby patients presenting in primary care with signs and symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 will be followed and their data linked to hospital outcomes (hospital admission and death). Data collection will be carried out by primary care clinicians in four arms: North West London Clinical Commissioning Groups (NWL CCGs), Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC), Covid Clinical Assessment Service (CCAS), and South East London CCGs (Doctaly platform). The study involves the use of an electronic template that incorporates a list of items (known as RECAP-V0) thought to be associated with disease outcome according to previous qualitative work. Data collected will be linked to patient outcomes in highly secure environments. We will then use multivariate logistic regression analyses for model development and validation.ResultsRecruitment of participants started in October 2020. Initially, only the NWL CCGs and RCGP RSC arms were active. As of March 24, 2021, we have recruited a combined sample of 3827 participants in these two arms. CCAS and Doctaly joined the study in February 2021, with CCAS starting the recruitment process on March 15, 2021. The first part of the analysis (RECAP-V1 model development) is planned to start in April 2021 using the first half of the NWL CCGs and RCGP RSC combined data set. Posteriorly, the model will be validated with the rest of the NWL CCGs and RCGP RSC data as well as the CCAS and Doctaly data sets. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee on May 27, 2020 (Integrated Research Application System number: 283024, Research Ethics Committee reference number: 20/NW/0266) and badged as National Institute of Health Research Urgent Public Health Study on October 14, 2020.ConclusionsWe believe the validated RECAP-V1 early warning score will be a valuable tool for the assessment of severity in patients with suspected COVID-19 in the community, either in face-to-face or remote consultations, and will facilitate the timely escalation of treatment with the potential to improve patient outcomes.Trial registrationISRCTN registry ISRCTN13953727; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN13953727.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/29072.
| S-EPMC8153031 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: The British STRATIFY tool was previously developed to predict falls in hospital. Although the tool has several strengths, certain limitations exist which may not allow generalizability to a Canadian setting. Thus, we tested the STRATIFY tool with some modification and re-weighting of items in Canadian hospitals. METHODS: This was a prospective validation cohort study in four acute care medical units of two teaching hospitals in Hamilton, Ontario. In total, 620 patients over the age of 65 years admitted during a 6-month period. Five patient characteristics found to be risk factors for falls in the British STRATIFY study were tested for predictive validity. The characteristics included history of falls, mental impairment, visual impairment, toileting, and dependency in transfers and mobility. Multivariate logistic regression was used to obtain optimal weights for the construction of a risk score. A receiver-operating characteristic curve was generated to show sensitivities and specificities for predicting falls based on different threshold scores for considering patients at high risk. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability for the weighted risk score indicated very good agreement (inter-class correlation coefficient = 0.78). History of falls, mental impairment, toileting difficulties, and dependency in transfer / mobility significantly predicted fallers. In the multivariate model, mental status was a significant predictor (P < 0.001) while history of falls and transfer / mobility difficulties approached significance (P = 0.089 and P = 0.077 respectively). The logistic regression model led to weights for a risk score on a 30-point scale. A risk score of 9 or more gave a sensitivity of 91% and specificity of 60% for predicting who would fall. CONCLUSION: Good predictive validity for identifying fallers was achieved in a Canadian setting using a simple-to-obtain risk score that can easily be incorporated into practice.
| S-EPMC333435 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Handwriting problems are one of the common problems among students in the early years of education. The current study aimed to determine further validation aspects of the Persian Handwriting Assessment Tool (PHAT) in primary school-aged children.Methods: The current methodological study was conducted on 452 healthy 8-10-year-old students in Tehran, Iran, selected via random cluster sampling method. Inclusion criteria were native Persian-speaking and no documented physical and mental impairments. Construct and structural validities were established by exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using principal axis factoring with Promax rotation and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), respectively. Criterion validity was examined by expert opinion as the gold standard using Pearson correlation test. Internal consistency, test-retest, and inter-rater reliability were examined using Cronbach’s alpha and intra-class correlation (ICC). Test-retest had a seven-day interval.Results: The EFA results indicated two separate factors in the copying and dictation domains. Speed and orthographic error and size were considered as separate items. The CFA confirmed the factor structure. Criterion validity revealed low to moderate correlation (formation: 0.548, P<0.001; 0.503, P<0.001, spacing: 0.553, P<0.001; 0.307, P=0.030, alignment: 0.442, P<0.001; 0.358, P=0.011, size: -0.376, P=0.007; -0.445, P<0.001, and slant: 0.360, P=0.010; 0.372, P=0.008) in copying and dictation domain, respectively. Acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.72-0.99), excellent test-retest (ICC: 0.76-0.99), excellent inter-rater reliability between teachers (ICC: 0.86-0.95), and good to excellent inter-rater reliability between teachers and the occupational therapist (ICC: 0.60-0.95) were reported. Conclusion: The results indicated that the PHAT was a valid and reliable tool for assessing handwriting in primary school-aged children.
| S-EPMC7253493 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo adapt the provider version of the Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT) for Vietnam and determine its internal consistency and validity.BackgroundThere is a growing need to measure and explore the impact of various characteristics of health care systems on the quality of primary care. It would provide the best evidence for policy makers if these evaluations come from both the demand and supply sides of the health care sector. Comparatively more researchers have studied primary care quality from the consumer perspective than from the provider's perspective. This study aims at the latter.MethodOur study translated and adapted the PCAT provider version (PCAT PE) into a Vietnamese version, after which a cross-sectional survey was conducted to examine the feasibility, internal consistency and validity of the Vietnamese PCAT provider version (VN PCAT PE). All general doctors working at 152 commune health centres in Thua Thien Hue province had been selected to participate in the survey.FindingsThe VN PCAT PE is an instrument for evaluation of primary care in Vietnam with 116 items comprising six scales representing four core primary care domains, and three additional scales representing three derivative domains. From the translation and cultural adaptation stage, two items were combined, two items were removed and one item was added. Six other items were excluded due to problems in item-total correlations. All items have a low non-response or 'don't know/don't remember' response rate, and there were no floor or ceiling effects. All scales had a Cronbach's alpha above 0.80, except for the Coordination scale, which still was above the minimum level of 0.70.ConclusionThe VN PCAT PE demonstrates adequate internal consistency and validity to be used as an effective tool for measuring the quality of primary care in Vietnam from the provider perspective.
| S-EPMC6609979 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSchool health programs need to target all aspects of physical, psychological, and social well-being. Using a slightly modified version of the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist, we developed and conducted the first validation of the School Health Assessment Tool for Primary Schools (SHAT-PS).MethodThe exploratory sequential mixed method was used in this study. In the first phase, scientific databases were systematically searched to find school health models and instruments and 65 interviews were conducted with school stakeholders. The Colaizzi's method was used to code the qualitative data into themes. Then, a pool of items was created for each theme, rechecked by psychometric experts and then validated for content (i.e., relevance, clarity, and comprehensiveness) by psychometric experts and individuals of the target population (i.e., school personnel). In the second phase, classical test theory was utilized to analyze the validity and reliability of the resulting items from phase 1 among 400 individuals working at primary schools.ResultsThe coding of the interviews resulted in ten themes that we labeled based on the theoretical literature: school health policies, community connections, health education, physical activity, health services, nutrition, psychological services, physical environment, equipment and facilities, and school staff's health. The items created for each theme ended up in an initial pool of 76 items. In the final stage of phase 1, 69 items remained after the content validity assessment by experts and school personnel. In phase 2, the SHAT-PS items were tested using maximum likelihood exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Of the 69 items from phase 1, 22 items were removed due to low factor loadings. The results showed that the 8-factor model was the best solution (chi-square/df = 2.41, CFI = .98, TLI = .97, RMSEA = .06). The discriminant and convergent validity of the SHAT-PS were evaluated as satisfactory and the scale had high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha for all subscales > .93). The test-retest reliability was satisfactory-the intraclass correlation coefficient pooled was .95 (99% CI [.91-.98]). Moreover, the standard error of measurement resulted in an SEM pooled equal to 4.4. No discrepancy was found between subgroups of gender and subgroups of staffs' positions at schools.ConclusionThe SHAT-PS is a valid and reliable tool that may facilitate school staff, stakeholders and researchers to evaluate the presence of the factors that promote health at primary schools. Nevertheless, in the process of validation, many of the items related to staff's health were eliminated due to poor factor loadings. Obviously, staff health is an important factor in the measurement of school health. Hence, we recommend that the validity and reliability of the SHAT-PS in other cultures should be done using the original 76-item version.
| S-EPMC8675247 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, risk stratification has been used to decide patient eligibility for inpatient, critical and domiciliary care. Here, we sought to validate the MSL-COVID-19 score, originally developed to predict COVID-19 mortality in Mexicans. Also, an adaptation of the formula is proposed for the prediction of COVID-19 severity in a triage setting (Nutri-CoV).MethodsWe included patients evaluated from March 16th to August 17th, 2020 at the Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición, defining severe COVID-19 as a composite of death, ICU admission or requirement for intubation (n = 3,007). We validated MSL-COVID-19 for prediction of mortality and severe disease. Using Elastic Net Cox regression, we trained (n = 1,831) and validated (n = 1,176) a model for prediction of severe COVID-19 using MSL-COVID-19 along with clinical assessments obtained at a triage setting.ResultsThe variables included in MSL-COVID-19 are: pneumonia, early onset type 2 diabetes, age > 65 years, chronic kidney disease, any form of immunosuppression, COPD, obesity, diabetes, and age <40 years. MSL-COVID-19 had good performance to predict COVID-19 mortality (c-statistic = 0.722, 95%CI 0.690-0.753) and severity (c-statistic = 0.777, 95%CI 0.753-0.801). The Nutri-CoV score includes the MSL-COVID-19 plus respiratory rate, and pulse oximetry. This tool had better performance in both training (c-statistic = 0.797, 95%CI 0.765-0.826) and validation cohorts (c-statistic = 0.772, 95%CI 0.0.745-0.800) compared to other severity scores.ConclusionsMSL-COVID-19 predicts inpatient COVID-19 lethality. The Nutri-CoV score is an adaptation of MSL-COVID-19 to be used in a triage environment. Both scores have been deployed as web-based tools for clinical use in a triage setting.
| S-EPMC7743927 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: As of August 11, 2020, Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected 19,936,210 persons and led to 732,499 deaths worldwide. The impact has been immense, and with no vaccine currently available, the best way to protect our communities is health education. We developed a brief COVID-19 knowledge test for health educators that can be used to assess deficits in clients' understanding of the disease. Methods: COVID-19 Knowledge Test items were developed by the research team and administered to participants. An alternate-choice item format was selected for the knowledge test, and data analysis was based on an American sample of 273 respondents. A detailed analysis of the data was conducted with classical test theory and Rasch analysis. Findings: The final instrument was found to be a unidimensional measure of COVID-19 knowledge. Results provided evidence for absolute model fit and model fit for individual items. All items included on the scale were monotonically increasing and split-half reliability was considered acceptable. Total test information revealed that the test is suitable for individuals with low to average knowledge of COVID-19. Interpretation: Rasch analysis provides support for the COVID-19 Knowledge Test to be used as an assessment tool for health educators. The final version of the test consists of 34 high-quality test items that can be administered in <10 min. Normative data and suggested cutoff scores are also provided.
| S-EPMC7676894 | biostudies-literature