The ADO index as a predictor of two-year mortality in general practice-based chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohorts

25Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: Existing prediction models for mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients have not yet been validated in primary care, which is where the majority of patients receive care. Objectives: Our aim was to validate the ADO (age, dyspnoea, airflow obstruction) index as a predictor of 2-year mortality in 2 general practice-based COPD cohorts. Methods: Six hundred and forty-six patients with COPD with GOLD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) stages I-IV were enrolled by their general practitioners and followed for 2 years. The ADO regression equation was used to predict a 2-year risk of all-cause mortality in each patient and this risk was compared with the observed 2-year mortality. Discrimination and calibration were assessed as well as the strength of association between the 15-point ADO score and the observed 2-year all-cause mortality. Results: Fifty-two (8.1%) patients died during the 2-year follow-up period. Discrimination with the ADO index was excellent with an area under the curve of 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.84]. Overall, the predicted and observed risks matched well and visual inspection revealed no important differences between them across 10 risk classes (p = 0.68). The odds ratio for death per point increase according to the ADO index was 1.50 (95% CI 1.31-1.71). Conclusions: The ADO index showed excellent prediction properties in an out-of-population validation carried out in COPD patients from primary care settings.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Abu Hussein, N., Ter Riet, G., Schoenenberger, L., Bridevaux, P. O., Chhajed, P. N., Fitting, J. W., … Leuppi, J. D. (2014). The ADO index as a predictor of two-year mortality in general practice-based chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohorts. Respiration, 88(3), 208–214. https://doi.org/10.1159/000363770

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free