IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0242953.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development and external validation of a prognostic tool for COVID-19 critical disease

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel S Chow
  • Justin Glavis-Bloom
  • Jennifer E Soun
  • Brent Weinberg
  • Theresa Berens Loveless
  • Xiaohui Xie
  • Simukayi Mutasa
  • Edwin Monuki
  • Jung In Park
  • Daniela Bota
  • Jie Wu
  • Leslie Thompson
  • Bernadette Boden-Albala
  • Saahir Khan
  • Alpesh N Amin
  • Peter D Chang

Abstract

Background: The rapid spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) revealed significant constraints in critical care capacity. In anticipation of subsequent waves, reliable prediction of disease severity is essential for critical care capacity management and may enable earlier targeted interventions to improve patient outcomes. The purpose of this study is to develop and externally validate a prognostic model/clinical tool for predicting COVID-19 critical disease at presentation to medical care. Methods: This is a retrospective study of a prognostic model for the prediction of COVID-19 critical disease where critical disease was defined as ICU admission, ventilation, and/or death. The derivation cohort was used to develop a multivariable logistic regression model. Covariates included patient comorbidities, presenting vital signs, and laboratory values. Model performance was assessed on the validation cohort by concordance statistics. The model was developed with consecutive patients with COVID-19 who presented to University of California Irvine Medical Center in Orange County, California. External validation was performed with a random sample of patients with COVID-19 at Emory Healthcare in Atlanta, Georgia. Results: Of a total 3208 patients tested in the derivation cohort, 9% (299/3028) were positive for COVID-19. Clinical data including past medical history and presenting laboratory values were available for 29% (87/299) of patients (median age, 48 years [range, 21–88 years]; 64% [36/55] male). The most common comorbidities included obesity (37%, 31/87), hypertension (37%, 32/87), and diabetes (24%, 24/87). Critical disease was present in 24% (21/87). After backward stepwise selection, the following factors were associated with greatest increased risk of critical disease: number of comorbidities, body mass index, respiratory rate, white blood cell count, % lymphocytes, serum creatinine, lactate dehydrogenase, high sensitivity troponin I, ferritin, procalcitonin, and C-reactive protein. Of a total of 40 patients in the validation cohort (median age, 60 years [range, 27–88 years]; 55% [22/40] male), critical disease was present in 65% (26/40). Model discrimination in the validation cohort was high (concordance statistic: 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.87–1.01). A web-based tool was developed to enable clinicians to input patient data and view likelihood of critical disease. Conclusions and relevance: We present a model which accurately predicted COVID-19 critical disease risk using comorbidities and presenting vital signs and laboratory values, on derivation and validation cohorts from two different institutions. If further validated on additional cohorts of patients, this model/clinical tool may provide useful prognostication of critical care needs.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel S Chow & Justin Glavis-Bloom & Jennifer E Soun & Brent Weinberg & Theresa Berens Loveless & Xiaohui Xie & Simukayi Mutasa & Edwin Monuki & Jung In Park & Daniela Bota & Jie Wu & Leslie Thompson, 2020. "Development and external validation of a prognostic tool for COVID-19 critical disease," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-11, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0242953
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242953
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0242953
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0242953&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0242953?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0242953. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.