Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2023
External Validation of a Dynamic Prediction Model for Upper Limb Function After Stroke.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Brunner Iris C, Andrinopoulou Eleni-Rosalina, Selles Ruud, Lundquist Camilla Biering, Pedersen Asger Roer
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the dynamic prediction model for prediction of upper limb (UL) function 6 months after stroke. The dynamic prediction model has been developed and cross-validated on data from 4 Dutch studies.
DESIGN: Data from a prospective Danish cohort study were used to assess prediction accuracy.
SETTING: A Danish neurorehabilitation hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: In this external validation study, follow-up data for 80 patients in the subacute phase after stroke (N=80), mean age 64 (SD11), 43% women, could be obtained. They were assessed at 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months after stroke with the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment upper limb (FMA), and Shoulder Abduction (SA) Finger Extension (FE), (SAFE) test.
INTERVENTION: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prediction accuracy at 6 months was examined for 3 categories of ARAT (0-57 points): mild (48-57), moderate (23-47), and severe (0-22). Two individual predictions of ARAT scores at ±6 months post-stroke were computed based on, respectively, baseline (2 weeks) and 3 months ARAT, FE, SA values. The absolute individual differences between observed and predicted ARAT scores were summarized.
RESULTS: The prediction model performed best for patients with relatively good UL motor function, with an absolute error median (IQR) of 3 (2-9), and worst for patients with severe UL impairment, with a median (IQR) of 30 (3-39) at baseline. In general, prediction accuracy substantially improved when data obtained 3 months after stroke was included compared with baseline at 2 weeks after stroke.
CONCLUSION: We found limited clinical usability due to the lack of prediction accuracy 2 weeks after stroke and for patients with severe UL impairments. The dynamic prediction model could probably be refined with data from biomarkers.
DESIGN: Data from a prospective Danish cohort study were used to assess prediction accuracy.
SETTING: A Danish neurorehabilitation hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: In this external validation study, follow-up data for 80 patients in the subacute phase after stroke (N=80), mean age 64 (SD11), 43% women, could be obtained. They were assessed at 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months after stroke with the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment upper limb (FMA), and Shoulder Abduction (SA) Finger Extension (FE), (SAFE) test.
INTERVENTION: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prediction accuracy at 6 months was examined for 3 categories of ARAT (0-57 points): mild (48-57), moderate (23-47), and severe (0-22). Two individual predictions of ARAT scores at ±6 months post-stroke were computed based on, respectively, baseline (2 weeks) and 3 months ARAT, FE, SA values. The absolute individual differences between observed and predicted ARAT scores were summarized.
RESULTS: The prediction model performed best for patients with relatively good UL motor function, with an absolute error median (IQR) of 3 (2-9), and worst for patients with severe UL impairment, with a median (IQR) of 30 (3-39) at baseline. In general, prediction accuracy substantially improved when data obtained 3 months after stroke was included compared with baseline at 2 weeks after stroke.
CONCLUSION: We found limited clinical usability due to the lack of prediction accuracy 2 weeks after stroke and for patients with severe UL impairments. The dynamic prediction model could probably be refined with data from biomarkers.