Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36579356›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2022

External Validation and User Experiences of the ProPal-COPD Tool to Identify the Palliative Phase in COPD.

Johanna M C Broese, Rianne M J J van der Kleij, Els M L Verschuur, Huib A M Kerstjens, Ewald M Bronkhorst, Niels H Chavannes, Yvonne Engels

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Johanna M C BroesePublic Health & Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4815-2305
Rianne M J J van der KleijPublic Health & Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Els M L VerschuurLung Alliance Netherlands, Amersfoort, the Netherlands.
Huib A M KerstjensRespiratory Medicine & Tuberculosis, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7705-7927
Ewald M BronkhorstHealth Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0953-8053
Niels H ChavannesPublic Health & Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8607-9199
Yvonne EngelsAnesthesiology, Pain & Palliative Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Leiden University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLLung Foundation Netherlands · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Difficulty predicting prognosis is a major barrier to timely palliative care provision for patients with COPD. The ProPal-COPD tool, combining six clinical indicators and the Surprise Question (SQ), aims to predict 1-year mortality as a proxy for palliative care needs. It appeared to be a promising tool for healthcare providers to identify patients with COPD who could benefit from palliative care. Objective: To externally validate the ProPal-COPD tool and to assess user experiences. Methods: Patients admitted with an acute exacerbation COPD were recruited across 10 hospitals. Demographics, clinical characteristics and survival status were collected. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the tool using two cut-off values were calculated. Also, predictive properties of the SQ were calculated. In monitoring meetings and interviews, healthcare providers shared their experiences with the tool. Transcripts were deductively coded using six user experience domains: Acceptability, Satisfaction, Credibility, Usability, User-reported adherence and Perceived impact. Results: A total of 523 patients with COPD were included between May 2019 and August 2020, of whom 100 (19.1%) died within 12 months. The ProPal-COPD tool had an AUC of 0.68 and a low sensitivity (55%) and moderate specificity (74%) for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality. Using a lower cut-off value, sensitivity was higher (74%), but specificity lower (46%). Sensitivity and specificity of the SQ were 56% and 73%, respectively (AUC 0.65). However, healthcare providers generally appreciated using the tool because it increased awareness of the palliative phase and provided a shared understanding of prognosis, although they considered its outcome not always correct. Conclusion: The accuracy of the ProPal-COPD tool to predict 1-year mortality is limited, although screening patients with its indicators increases healthcare providers' awareness of palliative care needs and encourages them to timely initiate appropriate care.

Indexed as

Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveHospitalizationHumansPalliative CarePrognosisadvance care planningchronic obstructive pulmonary diseasepalliative careprognosticationSurprise Question

Identifiers

PMID36579356
PMCPMC9792220
OpenAlexW4313211893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.