科研之友
微信
新浪微博
Facebook
分享链接
摘要
Background and purpose: ASTRAL, SEDAN and DRAGON scores are three well-validated scores for stroke outcome prediction. Whether these scores predict stroke outcome more accurately compared with physicians interested in stroke was investigated. Methods: Physicians interested in stroke were invited to an online anonymous survey to provide outcome estimates in randomly allocated structured scenarios of recent real-life stroke patients. Their estimates were compared to scores' predictions in the same scenarios. An estimate was considered accurate if it was within 95% confidence intervals of actual outcome. Results: In all, 244 participants from 32 different countries responded assessing 720 real scenarios and 2636 outcomes. The majority of physicians' estimates were inaccurate (1422/2636, 53.9%). 400 (56.8%) of physicians' estimates about the percentage probability of 3-month modified Rankin score (mRS) > 2 were accurate compared with 609 (86.5%) of ASTRAL score estimates (P < 0.0001). 394 (61.2%) of physicians' estimates about the percentage probability of post-thrombolysis symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage were accurate compared with 583 (90.5%) of SEDAN score estimates (P < 0.0001). 160 (24.8%) of physicians' estimates about post-thrombolysis 3-month percentage probability of mRS 0-2 were accurate compared with 240 (37.3%) DRAGON score estimates (P < 0.0001). 260 (40.4%) of physicians' estimates about the percentage probability of post-thrombolysis mRS 5-6 were accurate compared with 518 (80.4%) DRAGON score estimates (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: ASTRAL, DRAGON and SEDAN scores predict outcome of acute ischaemic stroke patients with higher accuracy compared to physicians interested in stroke.
- 出版日期2016-11
