PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Singh, Baldev
AU  - Kumari-Dewat, Nisha
AU  - Ryder, Adam
AU  - Klaire, Vijay
AU  - Bennion, Gemma
AU  - Jennens, Hannah
AU  - Matthews, Dawn
AU  - Rayner, Sophie
AU  - Ritzenthaler, Benoit
AU  - Shears, Jean
AU  - Ahmed, Kamran
AU  - Sidhu, Mona
AU  - Viswanath, Ananth
AU  - Warren, Kate
AU  - Parry, Emma
TI  - A prediction algorithm to improve the accuracy of the Gold Standard Framework Surprise Question end-of-life prognostic categories in an acute hospital admission cohort-controlled study. The Proactive Risk-Based and Data-Driven Assessment of Patients at the End of Life (PRADA)
AID  - 10.1101/2023.09.07.23295196
DP  - 2023 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2023.09.07.23295196
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/09/08/2023.09.07.23295196.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/09/08/2023.09.07.23295196.full
AB  - Objective To determine the accuracy of a clinical data algorithm allocated end-of-life prognosis amongst hospital inpatients.Method The model allocated a predicted Gold Standard Framework end-of-life prognosis to all acute medical patients admitted over a 2-year period. Mortality was determined at 1 year.Results Of 18,838 patients, end-of-life prognosis was unknown in 67.9%. A binary logistic regression model calculated 1-year mortality probability (X2=6650.2, p<0.001, r2 = 0.43). Probability cut off points were used to triage those with unknown prognosis using the GSF Surprise Question “Yes” or “No” survival categories (> or < 1 year respectively), with subsidiary classification of “No” to Green (months), Amber (weeks) or Red (days). This digitally driven prognosis allocation (100% vs baseline 32.1%) yielded cohorts of GSFSQ-Yes 15,264 (81%), GSFSQ-No Green 1,771 (9.4%) and GSFSQ-No Amber or Red 1,803 (9.6%).There were 5,043 (26.8%) deaths at 1 year. In Cox’s survival, model allocated cohorts were discrete for mortality (GSFSQ-Yes 16.4% v GSFSQ-No 71.0% (p<0.001). For the GSFSQ-No classification, the mortality Odds Ratio was 12.4 (11.4 – 13.5) (p<0.001) vs GSFSQ-Yes (c-statistic of 0.71 (0.70 – 0.73), p<0.001; accuracy, positive and negative predictive values of 81.2%, 83.6%, 83.6% respectively. If this tool had been utilised at the time of admission, the potential to reduce subsequent hospital admissions, death-in-hospital, and bed days was all p<0.001.Conclusions The defined model successfully allocated end-of-life prognosis in cohorts of hospitalised patients with strong performance metrics for prospective 1 year mortality, yielding the potential to provide anticipatory care and improve outcomes.What is already known about this topic?End-of-life care is fragmented with excessive hospital admission and death in hospital. Current processes to determine end-of-life prognosis and promote anticipatory care for better outcomes are of limited utility.What this paper adds?A patient centric data integration model permitted the development of a digital health care system (PRADA) which allows the use of advanced analytics to accurately determine end-of-life prognosis among those where it was otherwise unknown. This paper demonstrates the potential benefit of integrating this prediction tool into routine care, at scale, in large population-level cohorts.Implications for practice, theory, or policy In an era of advancing opportunity from informatics driven heath care, NHS policy, through commissioning to direct care, must now actively deploy such evidence-based digital systems into direct care, most specifically in data sharing across provider boundaries. We particularly hope the research community might consider testing and validating this approach.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNonAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Directorate of Research & Development of the Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust confirmed Ethical approval not requiredI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authorsCIconfidence intervalDIHdeath in hospitalEOLend of lifeEPaCCSElectronic Palliative Care Co-ordination SystemsEPRelectronic patient recordGDPRGeneral Data Protection RegulationGSF SQGold Standard Framework Surprise QuestionIAindex admissionIMDIndex of Multiple Deprivation.NEAnon-elective admissionNHSNational Health ServiceOROdd’s RatioPCAPrincipal components analysisPRADAProactive Risk-Based and Data-Driven Assessment of Patients at the End of LifeRCTrandomised controlled trialReSPECTRecommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and TreatmentROCreceiver operating curveSDstandard deviationSPCTspecialist palliative care team