Key result
Wells Score yields ~21% greater specificity but lower sensitivity than Revised Geneva Score for PE.
Why the study?
The Wells Score is commonly used but subjective, while the Revised Geneva Score is entirely objective; their diagnostic accuracy for PE needed comparison.
Does the Wells Score have better diagnostic accuracy than the Revised Geneva Score for diagnosing pulmonary embolism in emergency department patients?
Population
98 consecutive patients with clinically suspected PE referred for imaging in Australia
Comparison
Wells Score vs Revised Geneva Score
Design
Observational diagnostic accuracy study
Authors
Loading...
Supports the continued use of either clinical prediction rule for suspected PE; leaves open whether objective scoring.
Observational (n=98)
Does the Wells Score have better diagnostic accuracy than the Revised Geneva Score for diagnosing pulmonary embolism in emergency department patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 67.5% vs 47%
p-value: p=0.002
The Wells Score provides higher specificity than the Revised Geneva Score for diagnosing pulmonary embolism, potentially reducing unnecessary imaging scans.
Wong et al. (2010) conducted an observational in Clinically suspected pulmonary embolism (n=98). Wells Score vs. Revised Geneva Score was evaluated on Specificity for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (p=0.002). The Wells Score demonstrated significantly higher specificity (67.5% vs 47.0%, P=0.002) but lower sensitivity (46.7% vs 80.0%, P=0.06) compared to the Revised Geneva Score for diagnosing pulmonary embolism.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: