4.7 Review

Hospital length of stay prediction for general surgery and total knee arthroplasty admissions: Systematic review and meta-analysis of published prediction models

Journal

DIGITAL HEALTH
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/20552076231177497

Keywords

Risk; assessment; prediction; models; tools; factors; methods; length of stay; regression; machine learning

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This systematic review assessed the method, quality, and performance of prediction models for length of stay (LOS) in general surgery and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) populations. The results showed that these risk prediction models were rarely externally validated with poor study quality, mainly due to poor reporting. However, both machine learning and statistical modelling methods, as well as meta-analysis, demonstrated acceptable to good predictive performance, which is encouraging.
ObjectiveSystematic review of length of stay (LOS) prediction models to assess the study methods (including prediction variables), study quality, and performance of predictive models (using area under receiver operating curve (AUROC)) for general surgery populations and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). MethodLOS prediction models published since 2010 were identified in five major research databases. The main outcomes were model performance metrics including AUROC, prediction variables, and level of validation. Risk of bias was assessed using the PROBAST checklist. ResultsFive general surgery studies (15 models) and 10 TKA studies (24 models) were identified. All general surgery and 20 TKA models used statistical approaches; 4 TKA models used machine learning approaches. Risk scores, diagnosis, and procedure types were predominant predictors used. Risk of bias was ranked as moderate in 3/15 and high in 12/15 studies. Discrimination measures were reported in 14/15 and calibration measures in 3/15 studies, with only 4/39 externally validated models (3 general surgery and 1 TKA). Meta-analysis of externally validated models (3 general surgery) suggested the AUROC 95% prediction interval is excellent and ranges between 0.803 and 0.970. ConclusionThis is the first systematic review assessing quality of risk prediction models for prolonged LOS in general surgery and TKA groups. We showed that these risk prediction models were infrequently externally validated with poor study quality, typically related to poor reporting. Both machine learning and statistical modelling methods, plus the meta-analysis, showed acceptable to good predictive performance, which are encouraging. Moving forward, a focus on quality methods and external validation is needed before clinical application.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available