Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

BMJ Publishing Group, BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care, e6(12), p. e785-e791, 2019

DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2018-001761

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Imminent death: clinician certainty and accuracy of prognostic predictions

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

ObjectivesTo determine the accuracy of predictions of dying at different cut-off thresholds and to acknowledge the extent of clinical uncertainty.DesignSecondary analysis of data from a prospective cohort study.SettingAn online prognostic test, accessible by eligible participants across the UK.ParticipantsEligible participants were members of the Association of Palliative Medicine. 99/166 completed the test (60%), resulting in 1980 estimates (99 participants × 20 summaries).Main outcome measuresThe probability of death occurring within 72 hours (0% certain survival−100% certain death) for 20 patient summaries. The estimates were analysed using five different thresholds: 50/50%, 40/60%, 30/70%, 20/80% and 10/90%, with percentage values between these extremes being regarded as ‘indeterminate’. The positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and the number of indeterminate cases were calculated for each cut-off.ResultsUsing a <50% versus >50% threshold produced a PPV of 62%, an NPV of 74% and 5% indeterminate cases. When the threshold was changed to ≤10% vs ≥90%, the PPV and NPV increased to 75% and 88%, respectively, at the expense of an increase of indeterminate cases up to 62%.ConclusionWhen doctors assign a very high (≥90%) or very low (≤10%) probability of imminent death, their prognostic accuracy is improved; however, this increases the number of ‘indeterminate’ cases. This suggests that clinical predictions may continue to have a role for routine prognostication but that other approaches (such as the use of prognostic scores) may be required for those cases where doctors’ estimates are indeterminate.