External Validation of the Risk Assessment of Morbidity in Pediatric Surgery Score.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Emily K Clennon, Gina M Whitney, Steven J Staffa, Urvi Jhaveri Sanghvi, Wendy Gort, Eleonore Valencia, Kyle O Rove, Viviane G Nasr
{"title":"External Validation of the Risk Assessment of Morbidity in Pediatric Surgery Score.","authors":"Emily K Clennon, Gina M Whitney, Steven J Staffa, Urvi Jhaveri Sanghvi, Wendy Gort, Eleonore Valencia, Kyle O Rove, Viviane G Nasr","doi":"10.1213/ANE.0000000000008353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Risk Assessment of Morbidity in Pediatric Surgery (RAMPS) score was developed by a tertiary care children's center to predict risk of noncardiac pediatric surgical morbidity using intrinsic surgical risk (ISR) and individual comorbidity. The score demonstrated good internal validity, discrimination, and generalizability. This study seeks to externally validate the score in a similar patient population at a different tertiary care children's hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following institutional review board (IRB) approval, data for all noncardiac, nontrauma, and nontransplant pediatric surgeries performed at the external children's hospital in 2019 were collected via review of medical records. The RAMPS score for each patient was calculated. A composite morbidity score defined as transfer to intensive care unit (ICU), cardiac arrest, unplanned endotracheal intubation, or unplanned initiation of positive pressure ventilation (PPV) in the 72 hours following surgery was calculated. Discrimination was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, and calibration between predicted and observed risk of morbidity was assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 13,718 patients included, 409 (2.98%) experienced the composite morbidity outcome. The most common morbidity was postoperative PPV-361 (2.63%). Only 1.5% (n = 205) of the cohort was critically ill, though 14.1% (n = 1934) had at least three chronic conditions and 19.5% (n = 2668) of patients had a procedure in ISR quartiles 3 or 4. Each component of the RAMPS score was significantly associated with the outcome. The RAMPS score had very good discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.829; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.809-0.849) and good calibration between observed and predicted probabilities (Brier score = 0.03).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The RAMPS score performed well in this external validation with overall less patient complexity and less morbidity than in the original cohort included for development and internal validation. The score moderately overestimated risk in the most complex patients, which does not diminish its utility in guiding resource allocation to manage or prevent perioperative adverse events. In summary, the RAMPs score is a simple, highly discriminant, well-calibrated, and externally validated tool clinicians and health systems can use to predict morbidity among pediatric surgery patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":7784,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia and analgesia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia and analgesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000008353","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Risk Assessment of Morbidity in Pediatric Surgery (RAMPS) score was developed by a tertiary care children's center to predict risk of noncardiac pediatric surgical morbidity using intrinsic surgical risk (ISR) and individual comorbidity. The score demonstrated good internal validity, discrimination, and generalizability. This study seeks to externally validate the score in a similar patient population at a different tertiary care children's hospital.

Methods: Following institutional review board (IRB) approval, data for all noncardiac, nontrauma, and nontransplant pediatric surgeries performed at the external children's hospital in 2019 were collected via review of medical records. The RAMPS score for each patient was calculated. A composite morbidity score defined as transfer to intensive care unit (ICU), cardiac arrest, unplanned endotracheal intubation, or unplanned initiation of positive pressure ventilation (PPV) in the 72 hours following surgery was calculated. Discrimination was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, and calibration between predicted and observed risk of morbidity was assessed.

Results: Of 13,718 patients included, 409 (2.98%) experienced the composite morbidity outcome. The most common morbidity was postoperative PPV-361 (2.63%). Only 1.5% (n = 205) of the cohort was critically ill, though 14.1% (n = 1934) had at least three chronic conditions and 19.5% (n = 2668) of patients had a procedure in ISR quartiles 3 or 4. Each component of the RAMPS score was significantly associated with the outcome. The RAMPS score had very good discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.829; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.809-0.849) and good calibration between observed and predicted probabilities (Brier score = 0.03).

Conclusions: The RAMPS score performed well in this external validation with overall less patient complexity and less morbidity than in the original cohort included for development and internal validation. The score moderately overestimated risk in the most complex patients, which does not diminish its utility in guiding resource allocation to manage or prevent perioperative adverse events. In summary, the RAMPs score is a simple, highly discriminant, well-calibrated, and externally validated tool clinicians and health systems can use to predict morbidity among pediatric surgery patients.

儿科外科发病率评分风险评估的外部验证。
背景:儿童外科发病率风险评估(RAMPS)评分是由一家三级保健儿童中心开发的,用于使用内在手术风险(ISR)和个体合并症来预测非心脏儿科手术发病率的风险。该评分具有良好的内部效度、辨别力和概括性。本研究旨在从外部验证不同三级护理儿童医院的类似患者群体的评分。方法:经机构审查委员会(IRB)批准,通过审查医疗记录收集2019年在外部儿童医院进行的所有非心脏、非创伤和非移植儿科手术的数据。计算每位患者的RAMPS评分。计算手术后72小时内转入重症监护病房(ICU)、心脏骤停、计划外气管插管或计划外启动正压通气(PPV)的综合发病率评分。使用受试者工作特征曲线分析评估鉴别性,并评估预测和观察到的发病率风险之间的校准。结果:13718例患者中,409例(2.98%)出现复合发病结局。术后发生率最高的是PPV-361(2.63%)。只有1.5% (n = 205)的患者病情危重,但14.1% (n = 1934)的患者至少有三种慢性疾病,19.5% (n = 2668)的患者在ISR四分位数3或4中进行了手术。RAMPS评分的每个组成部分与结果显著相关。RAMPS评分具有很好的判别性(受试者工作特征曲线下面积[AUC] = 0.829; 95%可信区间[CI], 0.809-0.849),观测概率与预测概率之间具有很好的校准性(Brier评分= 0.03)。结论:RAMPS评分在外部验证中表现良好,总体而言患者复杂性和发病率低于原始队列,用于开发和内部验证。在大多数复杂的患者中,该评分中度高估了风险,这并不影响其在指导资源分配以管理或预防围手术期不良事件方面的效用。综上所述,RAMPs评分是临床医生和卫生系统可用于预测儿科手术患者发病率的一种简单、判别性高、校准良好且经过外部验证的工具。
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
Anesthesia and analgesia
Anesthesia and analgesia 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
9.90
自引率
7.00%
发文量
817
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Anesthesia & Analgesia exists for the benefit of patients under the care of health care professionals engaged in the disciplines broadly related to anesthesiology, perioperative medicine, critical care medicine, and pain medicine. The Journal furthers the care of these patients by reporting the fundamental advances in the science of these clinical disciplines and by documenting the clinical, laboratory, and administrative advances that guide therapy. Anesthesia & Analgesia seeks a balance between definitive clinical and management investigations and outstanding basic scientific reports. The Journal welcomes original manuscripts containing rigorous design and analysis, even if unusual in their approach.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书