Diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD): development and validation of a clinical prediction rule in primary care
Background: Diagnosing suspected left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) in the community is a challenge for GPs. We developed and validated a clinical prediction rule (CPR) for LVSD based on history, examination and electrocardiogram (ECG). Methods: Prospective cohort studies of 458 symptomati...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Family practice 2007-12, Vol.24 (6), p.628-635 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background: Diagnosing suspected left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) in the community is a challenge for GPs. We developed and validated a clinical prediction rule (CPR) for LVSD based on history, examination and electrocardiogram (ECG). Methods: Prospective cohort studies of 458 symptomatic patients (derivation cohort) and 535 patients (validation cohort) in 26 general practices in Tayside and Fife, Scotland. All patients underwent a structured clinical examination and ECG and the ‘reference standard’ investigation of echocardiography to establish the presence of LVSD. Results: Four elements from the clinical history and examination were all independently associated with LVSD—male sex [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.5; 95% CI 1.1, 5.0], presence of orthopnoea (OR 5.4; 1.9, 13.8) history of myocardial infarction (OR 5.6; 2.3, 13.6) and elevated jugular venous pulsations (OR 15.1; 4.6, 49.3). Addition of ECG (OR 20.6; 2.7, 158.6) provides important diagnostic information in terms of probability of LVSD. A CPR based on the presence or absence of these five elements will generate probabilities ranging from 1% to 97% for LVSD when applied to an individual patient. In the validation cohort, the model under-predicted the probability of LVSD, particularly at lower levels of expected risk, reflecting differences in the risk-factor profiles of the derivation and validation cohorts. Conclusions: The derived CPR provides quantitative estimates of post-test probability for LVSD. This rule requires further validation in other populations and settings because of the difficulties encountered in the validation cohort. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0263-2136 1460-2229 |
DOI: | 10.1093/fampra/cmm055 |