Validating the predictive precision of the dialogue support tool on Danish patient cohorts

Background: Despite advances in surgical techniques and diagnostics, some patients remain unsatisfied with the result following spine surgery. One way to improve patient satisfaction may be found in better alignment of expectations. Prognostic tools might prove useful in strengthening surgeon-patien...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Casper Friis Pedersen, Mikkel Østerheden Andersen, Leah Yacat Carreon, Søren Eiskjær
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2023-03-01
Series:North American Spine Society Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666548422000919
_version_ 1797867422819024896
author Casper Friis Pedersen
Mikkel Østerheden Andersen
Leah Yacat Carreon
Søren Eiskjær
author_facet Casper Friis Pedersen
Mikkel Østerheden Andersen
Leah Yacat Carreon
Søren Eiskjær
author_sort Casper Friis Pedersen
collection DOAJ
description Background: Despite advances in surgical techniques and diagnostics, some patients remain unsatisfied with the result following spine surgery. One way to improve patient satisfaction may be found in better alignment of expectations. Prognostic tools might prove useful in strengthening surgeon-patient communication prior to surgery. The purpose of this study is to assess the predictive capabilities of the Swedish based Dialogue Support (DS) tool for spine surgery on a Danish population. Methods: The study included the diagnoses lumbar disc herniation, lumbar spinal stenosis, and lumbar degenerative disc disease. A total of 5.954 patients were retrieved from the Danish national spine registry (DaneSpine). For each group, 200 random cases with complete preoperative and 1 year follow-up data were selected. Two outcome measures were used: Global assessment of pain (GA pain) and satisfaction with outcome. Predictions were produced by manual entry in the DS application. Goodness of fit tests were used to compare the predicted distribution of proportions with successful outcomes (GA pain) to the actual distribution in the three samples. Binomial tests were performed to evaluate the predicted proportion of satisfied patients. Furthermore, ROC-curves, calibration plots, and metrics were calculated to assess the predictive performance. Results: ROC curves showed comparable AUC values with the values reported by the developing authors of the DS from 0.62 to 0.73 (GA pain) and 0.64 to 0.70 (satisfaction with outcome). The calibration plots, however, revealed a low degree of concordance. For GA pain sensitivity varied from 92.4% to 99.3%, and specificity from 1.5% to 13.4%. For satisfaction, sensitivity varied from 97.1% to 99.2% and specificity from 0.0% to 2.9%. Conclusions: The predictive capabilities of the DS tool could not be generalized to the Danish sample cohorts. Further research on larger samples, provided full access to the underlying algorithms can be obtained, could produce a different result.
first_indexed 2024-04-09T23:39:58Z
format Article
id doaj.art-e9bd7578b46d462db4e74c612c7d17c8
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2666-5484
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-09T23:39:58Z
publishDate 2023-03-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
series North American Spine Society Journal
spelling doaj.art-e9bd7578b46d462db4e74c612c7d17c82023-03-19T04:38:39ZengElsevierNorth American Spine Society Journal2666-54842023-03-0113100188Validating the predictive precision of the dialogue support tool on Danish patient cohortsCasper Friis Pedersen0Mikkel Østerheden Andersen1Leah Yacat Carreon2Søren Eiskjær3University of Southern Denmark, Center for Spine Surgery and Research, Spinecenter of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital, Oestre Hougvej 55, DK-5500 Middelfart, Denmark; Corresponding author at: Center for Spine Surgery and Research, Spinecenter of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital, Oestre Hougvej 55, DK-5500 Middelfart, Denmark.University of Southern Denmark, Center for Spine Surgery and Research, Spinecenter of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital, Oestre Hougvej 55, DK-5500 Middelfart, DenmarkUniversity of Southern Denmark, Center for Spine Surgery and Research, Spinecenter of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital, Oestre Hougvej 55, DK-5500 Middelfart, DenmarkAalborg University, Dept. of Orthopedic Surgery, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000 Aalborg, DenmarkBackground: Despite advances in surgical techniques and diagnostics, some patients remain unsatisfied with the result following spine surgery. One way to improve patient satisfaction may be found in better alignment of expectations. Prognostic tools might prove useful in strengthening surgeon-patient communication prior to surgery. The purpose of this study is to assess the predictive capabilities of the Swedish based Dialogue Support (DS) tool for spine surgery on a Danish population. Methods: The study included the diagnoses lumbar disc herniation, lumbar spinal stenosis, and lumbar degenerative disc disease. A total of 5.954 patients were retrieved from the Danish national spine registry (DaneSpine). For each group, 200 random cases with complete preoperative and 1 year follow-up data were selected. Two outcome measures were used: Global assessment of pain (GA pain) and satisfaction with outcome. Predictions were produced by manual entry in the DS application. Goodness of fit tests were used to compare the predicted distribution of proportions with successful outcomes (GA pain) to the actual distribution in the three samples. Binomial tests were performed to evaluate the predicted proportion of satisfied patients. Furthermore, ROC-curves, calibration plots, and metrics were calculated to assess the predictive performance. Results: ROC curves showed comparable AUC values with the values reported by the developing authors of the DS from 0.62 to 0.73 (GA pain) and 0.64 to 0.70 (satisfaction with outcome). The calibration plots, however, revealed a low degree of concordance. For GA pain sensitivity varied from 92.4% to 99.3%, and specificity from 1.5% to 13.4%. For satisfaction, sensitivity varied from 97.1% to 99.2% and specificity from 0.0% to 2.9%. Conclusions: The predictive capabilities of the DS tool could not be generalized to the Danish sample cohorts. Further research on larger samples, provided full access to the underlying algorithms can be obtained, could produce a different result.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666548422000919Spine surgeryOutcomePredictionDialogue supportShared decision-makingValidation
spellingShingle Casper Friis Pedersen
Mikkel Østerheden Andersen
Leah Yacat Carreon
Søren Eiskjær
Validating the predictive precision of the dialogue support tool on Danish patient cohorts
North American Spine Society Journal
Spine surgery
Outcome
Prediction
Dialogue support
Shared decision-making
Validation
title Validating the predictive precision of the dialogue support tool on Danish patient cohorts
title_full Validating the predictive precision of the dialogue support tool on Danish patient cohorts
title_fullStr Validating the predictive precision of the dialogue support tool on Danish patient cohorts
title_full_unstemmed Validating the predictive precision of the dialogue support tool on Danish patient cohorts
title_short Validating the predictive precision of the dialogue support tool on Danish patient cohorts
title_sort validating the predictive precision of the dialogue support tool on danish patient cohorts
topic Spine surgery
Outcome
Prediction
Dialogue support
Shared decision-making
Validation
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666548422000919
work_keys_str_mv AT casperfriispedersen validatingthepredictiveprecisionofthedialoguesupporttoolondanishpatientcohorts
AT mikkeløsterhedenandersen validatingthepredictiveprecisionofthedialoguesupporttoolondanishpatientcohorts
AT leahyacatcarreon validatingthepredictiveprecisionofthedialoguesupporttoolondanishpatientcohorts
AT søreneiskjær validatingthepredictiveprecisionofthedialoguesupporttoolondanishpatientcohorts