{"title":"External validation of three scores for predicting prehospital return of spontaneous circulation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest","authors":"Cheng-Yi Fan MD , Edward Pei-Chuan Huang MD, MS , Chun-Hsiang Huang MD , Sih-Shiang Huang MD , Chien-Tai Huang MD , Yi-Ju Ho MD , Ching-Yu Chen MD , Chi-Hsin Chen MD , Chun-Ju Lien MD , Wei-Tien Chang MD, PhD , Chih-Wei Sung MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajem.2025.03.048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Although three established models for predicting the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) exist, combinational external validation of these models remains limited. This study aimed to externally validate and compare the performance of three predictive models—RACA, P-ROSC, and UB-ROSC–and provide evidence to guide the selection and application of predictive models for prehospital ROSC in diverse settings.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A retrospective validation was conducted using the National Taiwan University Hospital Hsinchu and Yunlin Branch Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Research Databases. Patients with EMS-treated OHCAs admitted to the hospital between January 2016 and July 2023 were recruited. The primary outcome was prehospital ROSC. Model performance was evaluated using discrimination, calibration, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic odds ratio. Calibration and density distribution plots were generated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>All three models demonstrated moderate-to-high discrimination with AUROCs of 0.758 (RACA), 0.755 (P-ROSC), and 0.747 (UB-ROSC). The RACA score exhibited better calibration across the risk deciles, whereas the P-ROSC and UB-ROSC scores tended to overestimate the probabilities at higher predicted risk levels. The P-ROSC score required fewer variables and showed the best separation between prehospital and non-prehospital ROSC cases. Optimal cut-off values for the RACA, P-ROSC, and UB-ROSC scores were 0.45, 41, and − 13, respectively, with corresponding sensitivities of 62 %, 56 %, and 71 % and specificities of 78 %, 82 %, and 69 %. All models achieved high NPVs (>96 %), but PPVs remained low (16–21 %).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The P-ROSC, which requires fewer variables, has emerged as the most practical model for Taiwanese populations. However, the choice of the model should be guided by the availability of variables, regional EMS characteristics, and trends in prehospital ROSC rates.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55536,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":"93 ","pages":"Pages 57-63"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S073567572500213X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Although three established models for predicting the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) exist, combinational external validation of these models remains limited. This study aimed to externally validate and compare the performance of three predictive models—RACA, P-ROSC, and UB-ROSC–and provide evidence to guide the selection and application of predictive models for prehospital ROSC in diverse settings.
Methods
A retrospective validation was conducted using the National Taiwan University Hospital Hsinchu and Yunlin Branch Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Research Databases. Patients with EMS-treated OHCAs admitted to the hospital between January 2016 and July 2023 were recruited. The primary outcome was prehospital ROSC. Model performance was evaluated using discrimination, calibration, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic odds ratio. Calibration and density distribution plots were generated.
Results
All three models demonstrated moderate-to-high discrimination with AUROCs of 0.758 (RACA), 0.755 (P-ROSC), and 0.747 (UB-ROSC). The RACA score exhibited better calibration across the risk deciles, whereas the P-ROSC and UB-ROSC scores tended to overestimate the probabilities at higher predicted risk levels. The P-ROSC score required fewer variables and showed the best separation between prehospital and non-prehospital ROSC cases. Optimal cut-off values for the RACA, P-ROSC, and UB-ROSC scores were 0.45, 41, and − 13, respectively, with corresponding sensitivities of 62 %, 56 %, and 71 % and specificities of 78 %, 82 %, and 69 %. All models achieved high NPVs (>96 %), but PPVs remained low (16–21 %).
Conclusions
The P-ROSC, which requires fewer variables, has emerged as the most practical model for Taiwanese populations. However, the choice of the model should be guided by the availability of variables, regional EMS characteristics, and trends in prehospital ROSC rates.
期刊介绍:
A distinctive blend of practicality and scholarliness makes the American Journal of Emergency Medicine a key source for information on emergency medical care. Covering all activities concerned with emergency medicine, it is the journal to turn to for information to help increase the ability to understand, recognize and treat emergency conditions. Issues contain clinical articles, case reports, review articles, editorials, international notes, book reviews and more.