Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Clinical risk scores for predicting stroke-associated pneumonia: A systematic review

  • Amit K. Kishore*
  • , Andy Vail
  • , Benjamin D. Bray
  • , Angel Chamorro
  • , Mario Di Napoli
  • , Lalit Kalra
  • , Peter Langhorne
  • , Joan Montaner
  • , Christine Roffe
  • , Anthony G. Rudd
  • , Pippa J. Tyrrell
  • , Diederik van de Beek
  • , Mark Woodhead
  • , Andreas Meisel
  • , Craig J. Smith
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • University of Manchester
  • Northern Care Alliance NHS Group
  • King's College London
  • University of Barcelona
  • San Camillo de’ Lellis General Hospital
  • King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust London
  • University of Glasgow
  • Autonomous University of Barcelona
  • CSIC-JA-USE - Institute of Biomedicine of Seville
  • Keele University
  • Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
  • Centre for Stroke Research
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

16 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Purpose: Several risk stratification scores for predicting stroke-associated pneumonia have been derived. We aimed to evaluate the performance and clinical usefulness of such scores for predicting stroke-associated pneumonia. Method: A systematic literature review was undertaken in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement, with application of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy-2 tool. Published studies of hospitalised adults with ischaemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage, or both, which derived and validated an integer-based clinical risk score, or externally validated an existing score to predict occurrence of stroke-associated pneumonia, were considered and independently screened for inclusion by two reviewers. Findings: We identified nine scores, from eight derivation cohorts. Age was a component of all scores, and the NIHSS score in all except one. Six scores were internally validated and five scores were externally validated. The A2DS2 score (Age, Atrial fibrillation, Dysphagia, Severity [NIHSS], Sex) was the most externally validated in 8 independent cohorts. Performance measures were reported for eight scores. Discrimination tended to be more variable in the external validation cohorts (C statistic 0.67–0.83) than the derivation cohorts (C statistic 0.74–0.85). Discussion: Overall, discrimination and calibration were similar between the different scores. No study evaluated influence on clinical decision making or prognosis. Conclusion: The clinical prediction scores varied in their simplicity of use and were comparable in performance. Utility of such scores for preventive intervention trials and in clinical practice remains uncertain and requires further study.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)76-84
Number of pages9
JournalEuropean Stroke Journal
Volume1
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2016

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • intracerebral haemorrhage
  • ischaemic stroke
  • pneumonia
  • risk score

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical risk scores for predicting stroke-associated pneumonia: A systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this