Prediction Models for Post‐Stroke Hospital Readmission: A Systematic Review
2024

Prediction Models for Post-Stroke Hospital Readmission

Sample size: 16 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Yijun Mao, Qiang Liu, Hui Fan, Erqing Li, Wenjing He, Xueqian Ouyang, Xiaojuan Wang, Li Qiu, Huanni Dong

Primary Institution: Xianyang Central Hospital

Hypothesis

This study aims to evaluate the predictive performance and methodological quality of post-stroke readmission prediction models.

Conclusion

The review found that existing readmission prediction models for stroke generally exhibit good predictive performance but require further validation and adaptation for practical use.

Supporting Evidence

  • Eleven studies and 16 prediction models were included in the review.
  • The sample sizes of the studies ranged from 108 to 803,124 cases.
  • Common predictors included length of stay, hypertension, age, and functional disability.
  • Twelve models reported an area under the curve (AUC) ranging from 0.520 to 0.940.
  • Only one model included both internal and external validation.
  • Six models had internal validation.
  • High readmission rates may indicate unresolved issues at discharge.
  • Reducing unnecessary readmissions is crucial for quality improvement.

Takeaway

The study looked at different models that predict if stroke patients will need to go back to the hospital after being discharged, and found some good options but also noted that they need more testing.

Methodology

A systematic review of 11 studies and 16 prediction models was conducted, assessing their predictive performance and methodological quality.

Potential Biases

High risk of bias was found in 11 studies, particularly in data analysis.

Limitations

The generalizability of the models is uncertain due to methodological limitations and high risk of bias in many studies.

Participant Demographics

The studies included stroke patients, with sample sizes ranging from 108 to 803,124.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.13

Confidence Interval

0.08–0.18

Statistical Significance

p<0.001

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1111/phn.13441

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication