[Comparison of different prediction models for the occurrence of nausea and vomiting in the postoperative phase : A systematic qualitative comparison based on prospectively defined quality indicators].

Die Anaesthesiologie Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-06 DOI:10.1007/s00101-024-01386-5

T Backmund, T Bohlender, C Gaik, T Koch, P Kranke, S Nardi-Hiebl, B Vojnar, L H J Eberhart

{"title":"[Comparison of different prediction models for the occurrence of nausea and vomiting in the postoperative phase : A systematic qualitative comparison based on prospectively defined quality indicators].","authors":"T Backmund, T Bohlender, C Gaik, T Koch, P Kranke, S Nardi-Hiebl, B Vojnar, L H J Eberhart","doi":"10.1007/s00101-024-01386-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Various prognostic prediction models exist for evaluating the risk of nausea and vomiting in the postoperative period (PONV). So far, no systematic comparison of these prognostic scores is available.Method: A systematic literature search was carried out in seven medical databases to find publications on prognostic PONV models. Identified scores were assessed against prospectively defined quality criteria, including generalizability, validation and clinical relevance of the models.Results: The literature search revealed 62 relevant publications with a total of 81,834 patients which could be assigned to 8 prognostic models. The simplified Apfel score performed best, primarily because it was extensively validated. The Van den Bosch score and Sinclair score tied for second place. The simplified Koivuranta score was in third place.Conclusion: The qualitative analysis highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each prediction system based on predetermined standardized quality criteria.","PeriodicalId":72805,"journal":{"name":"Die Anaesthesiologie","volume":" ","pages":"251-262"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Die Anaesthesiologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-024-01386-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Various prognostic prediction models exist for evaluating the risk of nausea and vomiting in the postoperative period (PONV). So far, no systematic comparison of these prognostic scores is available.

Method: A systematic literature search was carried out in seven medical databases to find publications on prognostic PONV models. Identified scores were assessed against prospectively defined quality criteria, including generalizability, validation and clinical relevance of the models.

Results: The literature search revealed 62 relevant publications with a total of 81,834 patients which could be assigned to 8 prognostic models. The simplified Apfel score performed best, primarily because it was extensively validated. The Van den Bosch score and Sinclair score tied for second place. The simplified Koivuranta score was in third place.

Conclusion: The qualitative analysis highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each prediction system based on predetermined standardized quality criteria.

查看原文本刊更多论文

[术后恶心和呕吐发生率的不同预测模型比较：基于前瞻性质量指标的系统性定性比较]。

背景：目前有多种预后预测模型用于评估术后恶心和呕吐（PONV）的风险。迄今为止，尚未对这些预后评分进行系统比较：方法：我们在七个医学数据库中进行了系统的文献检索，以查找有关 PONV 预后模型的出版物。根据前瞻性定义的质量标准，包括模型的通用性、验证和临床相关性，对确定的评分进行了评估：文献检索发现了 62 篇相关文献，共有 81,834 名患者可被分配到 8 个预后模型中。简化的 Apfel 评分表现最佳，主要是因为它经过了广泛的验证。Van den Bosch 评分和 Sinclair 评分并列第二。简化的 Koivuranta 评分排在第三位：定性分析强调了基于预定标准化质量标准的每种预测系统的优缺点。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Die Anaesthesiologie

自引率

0.00%

发文量