Abstract
Objective
This study aimed to externally validate a reported model for identifying patients requiring extended stay following lower limb arthroplasty in a new setting.
Design
External validation of a previously reported prognostic model, using retrospective data.
Setting
Medium-sized hospital orthopaedic department, Australia.
Participants
Electronic medical records were accessed for data collection between Sep-2019 and Feb-2020 and retrospective data extracted from 200 randomly selected total hip or knee arthroplasty patients.
Intervention
Participants received total hip or knee replacement between 2-Feb-16 and 4-Apr-19. This study was a non-interventional retrospective study.
Main measures
Model validation was assessed with discrimination, calibration on both original and adjusted forms of the candidate model. Decision curve analysis was conducted on the outputs of the adjusted model to determine net benefit at a predetermined decision threshold (0.5).
Results
The original model performed poorly, grossly overestimating length of stay with mean calibration of −3.6 (95% confidence interval −3.9 to −3.2) and calibration slope of 0.52. Performance improved following adjustment of the model intercept and model coefficients (mean calibration 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.80 and slope of 1.0), but remained poorly calibrated at low and medium risk threshold and net benefit was modest (three additional patients per hundred identified as at-risk) at the a-priori risk threshold.
Conclusions
External validation demonstrated poor performance when applied to a new patient population and would provide limited benefit for our institution. Implementation of predictive models for arthroplasty should include practical assessment of discrimination, calibration and net benefit at a clinically acceptable threshold.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
