Key result
First-day AMI READMITS score predicts nonelective 30-day readmissions with a 0.73 C-statistic.
Why the study?
Currently available AMI readmission risk prediction models have poor-to-modest predictive ability and are not readily actionable in real time.
Does the AMI READMITS score accurately predict all-cause nonelective 30-day readmissions in patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction?
Cohort (n=826)
Yes
Does the AMI READMITS score accurately predict all-cause nonelective 30-day readmissions in patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction?
Effect estimate: C-statistic 0.73 (95% CI 0.71-0.74)
The AMI READMITS score provides a parsimonious and accurate tool for early identification of AMI patients at high risk for 30-day readmission within the first 24 hours of hospitalization.
May support early readmission risk stratification in AMI; leaves open whether implementation improves outcomes.
Background Readmissions after hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction ( AMI ) are common. However, the few currently available AMI readmission risk prediction models have poor‐to‐modest predictive ability and are not readily actionable in real time. We sought to develop an actionable and accurate AMI readmission risk prediction model to identify high‐risk patients as early as possible during hospitalization. Methods and Results We used electronic health record data from consecutive AMI hospitalizations from 6 hospitals in north Texas from 2009 to 2010 to derive and validate models predicting all‐cause nonelective 30‐day readmissions, using stepwise backward selection and 5‐fold cross‐validation. Of 826 patients hospitalized with AMI , 13% had a 30‐day readmission. The first‐day AMI model (the AMI “ READMITS ” score) included 7 predictors: renal function, elevated brain natriuretic peptide, age, diabetes mellitus, nonmale sex, intervention with timely percutaneous coronary intervention, and low systolic blood pressure, had an optimism‐corrected C‐statistic of 0.73 (95% confidence interval, 0.71–0.74) and was well calibrated. The full‐stay AMI model, which included 3 additional predictors (use of intravenous diuretics, anemia on discharge, and discharge to postacute care), had an optimism‐corrected C‐statistic of 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.74–0.76) with minimally improved net reclassification and calibration. Both AMI models outperformed corresponding multicondition readmission models. Conclusions The parsimonious AMI READMITS score enables early prospective identification of high‐risk AMI patients for targeted readmissions reduction interventions within the first 24 hours of hospitalization. A full‐stay AMI readmission model only modestly outperformed the AMI READMITS score in terms of discrimination, but surprisingly did not meaningfully improve reclassification.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nguyen et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction (n=826). AMI READMITS score vs. Full-stay AMI model was evaluated on All-cause nonelective 30-day readmissions (C-statistic 0.73, 95% CI 0.71-0.74). The first-day AMI READMITS score predicted all-cause nonelective 30-day readmissions with an optimism-corrected C-statistic of 0.73 (95% CI 0.71-0.74).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: