Predicting the probability of good neurological outcome after in-hospital cardiac arrest based on prearrest factors: validation of the good outcome following attempted resuscitation 2 (GO-FAR 2) score

The Good Outcome Following Attempted Resuscitation (GO-FAR) 2 score is a prognostic tool developed to support decision-making for do-not-attempt-resuscitation (DNAR) orders by predicting neurological outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) based on prearrest variables. However, this scoring...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Internal and emergency medicine 2023-09, Vol.18 (6), p.1807-1813
Main Authors: Kim, Boram, Hong, Seok-In, Kim, Youn-Jung, Cho, Yeon Joo, Kim, Won Young
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Cardiac arrest
Decision making
EM - Original
Heart
Internal Medicine
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-ab5e54fc7b846be9b50ed054a51af66ccd59ee019e633d963c225d460ae6277d3
container_end_page 1813
container_issue 6
container_start_page 1807
container_title Internal and emergency medicine
container_volume 18
creator Kim, Boram
Hong, Seok-In
Kim, Youn-Jung
Cho, Yeon Joo
Kim, Won Young
description The Good Outcome Following Attempted Resuscitation (GO-FAR) 2 score is a prognostic tool developed to support decision-making for do-not-attempt-resuscitation (DNAR) orders by predicting neurological outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) based on prearrest variables. However, this scoring system requires further validation. We aimed to validate the GO-FAR 2 score for predicting good neurological outcome in Korean patients with IHCA. A single-centre registry of adult patients with IHCA from 2013 to 2017 was analysed. The primary outcome was discharge with good neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2). The patients were divided into four categories according to the GO-FAR 2 score: very poor (≥ 5), poor (2–4), average (− 3 to 1), and above-average (
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11739-023-03271-2
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2807922210</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2865142668</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-ab5e54fc7b846be9b50ed054a51af66ccd59ee019e633d963c225d460ae6277d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1uFiEUhifGxtbqDbgwJG7qAsvPADPumsbWJk3aGF0TBs58pWGGT2A0vUMvS76f2sRFVxDOc973HN6meUfJJ0qIOs2UKt5jwjgmnCmK2YvmiPaK4J5L-bLeO9Zh0rbqsHmd8z0hQkiqXjWHXFEqWtofNX9uEzhvi59XqNwBWqc4mMEHXx5QHNEqRodmWFIMceWtCSguxcYJkBkLJORnfBfz2pdasSY5bywyKUEuaDAZHIpzlYT902hsiSl_Rr9M8M4UX6vVZOO7NXrUHmMI8fdmJFMKTOtSharAkm012nYxdHJ5gy_OviH2EWUbE7xpDkYTMrzdn8fNj4sv38-_4uuby6vzs2tsOZMFm0GAaEerhq6VA_SDIOCIaI2gZpTSWid6AEJ7kJy7XnLLmHCtJAYkU8rx4-Zkp1t_6udSt9KTzxZCMDPEJWvWEdUzxiip6If_0Pu4pLlOVykpaMuk7CrFdpRNMecEo14nP5n0oCnRm5z1Lmddc9bbnDWrTe_30sswgfvX8hhsBfgOyLU0ryA9eT8j-xeOwrbb</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2865142668</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Predicting the probability of good neurological outcome after in-hospital cardiac arrest based on prearrest factors: validation of the good outcome following attempted resuscitation 2 (GO-FAR 2) score</title><source>Springer Nature:Jisc Collections:Springer Nature Read and Publish 2023-2025: Springer Reading List</source><creator>Kim, Boram ; Hong, Seok-In ; Kim, Youn-Jung ; Cho, Yeon Joo ; Kim, Won Young</creator><creatorcontrib>Kim, Boram ; Hong, Seok-In ; Kim, Youn-Jung ; Cho, Yeon Joo ; Kim, Won Young</creatorcontrib><description>The Good Outcome Following Attempted Resuscitation (GO-FAR) 2 score is a prognostic tool developed to support decision-making for do-not-attempt-resuscitation (DNAR) orders by predicting neurological outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) based on prearrest variables. However, this scoring system requires further validation. We aimed to validate the GO-FAR 2 score for predicting good neurological outcome in Korean patients with IHCA. A single-centre registry of adult patients with IHCA from 2013 to 2017 was analysed. The primary outcome was discharge with good neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2). The patients were divided into four categories according to the GO-FAR 2 score: very poor (≥ 5), poor (2–4), average (− 3 to 1), and above-average (&lt; − 3) likelihood of good neurological outcome. Of 1,011 patients (median age, 65 years), 63.1% were men. The rate of good neurological outcome was 16.0%. The proportions of patients categorised as having very poor, poor, average, and above-average probability of good neurological outcome were 3.9%, 18.3%, 70.2%, and 7.6%, respectively. In each category, good neurological outcome was observed in 0%, 1.1%, 16.8%, and 53.2%, respectively. Among patients in below-average categories (very poor + poor, GO-FAR 2 score ≥ 2), only 0.9% had good outcome. GO-FAR 2 score ≥ 2 showed a sensitivity of 98.8% and a negative predictive value of 99.1% in predicting good neurological outcome. The GO-FAR 2 score can predict neurological outcome after IHCA. In particular, GO-FAR 2 score ≥ 2 may support decision-making for DNAR orders.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1828-0447</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1970-9366</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1970-9366</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11739-023-03271-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37115419</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Cardiac arrest ; Decision making ; EM - Original ; Heart ; Internal Medicine ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><ispartof>Internal and emergency medicine, 2023-09, Vol.18 (6), p.1807-1813</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Società Italiana di Medicina Interna (SIMI) 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><rights>2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Società Italiana di Medicina Interna (SIMI).</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-ab5e54fc7b846be9b50ed054a51af66ccd59ee019e633d963c225d460ae6277d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8642-6552</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37115419$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kim, Boram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hong, Seok-In</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Youn-Jung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Yeon Joo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Won Young</creatorcontrib><title>Predicting the probability of good neurological outcome after in-hospital cardiac arrest based on prearrest factors: validation of the good outcome following attempted resuscitation 2 (GO-FAR 2) score</title><title>Internal and emergency medicine</title><addtitle>Intern Emerg Med</addtitle><addtitle>Intern Emerg Med</addtitle><description>The Good Outcome Following Attempted Resuscitation (GO-FAR) 2 score is a prognostic tool developed to support decision-making for do-not-attempt-resuscitation (DNAR) orders by predicting neurological outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) based on prearrest variables. However, this scoring system requires further validation. We aimed to validate the GO-FAR 2 score for predicting good neurological outcome in Korean patients with IHCA. A single-centre registry of adult patients with IHCA from 2013 to 2017 was analysed. The primary outcome was discharge with good neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2). The patients were divided into four categories according to the GO-FAR 2 score: very poor (≥ 5), poor (2–4), average (− 3 to 1), and above-average (&lt; − 3) likelihood of good neurological outcome. Of 1,011 patients (median age, 65 years), 63.1% were men. The rate of good neurological outcome was 16.0%. The proportions of patients categorised as having very poor, poor, average, and above-average probability of good neurological outcome were 3.9%, 18.3%, 70.2%, and 7.6%, respectively. In each category, good neurological outcome was observed in 0%, 1.1%, 16.8%, and 53.2%, respectively. Among patients in below-average categories (very poor + poor, GO-FAR 2 score ≥ 2), only 0.9% had good outcome. GO-FAR 2 score ≥ 2 showed a sensitivity of 98.8% and a negative predictive value of 99.1% in predicting good neurological outcome. The GO-FAR 2 score can predict neurological outcome after IHCA. In particular, GO-FAR 2 score ≥ 2 may support decision-making for DNAR orders.</description><subject>Cardiac arrest</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>EM - Original</subject><subject>Heart</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><issn>1828-0447</issn><issn>1970-9366</issn><issn>1970-9366</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kc1uFiEUhifGxtbqDbgwJG7qAsvPADPumsbWJk3aGF0TBs58pWGGT2A0vUMvS76f2sRFVxDOc973HN6meUfJJ0qIOs2UKt5jwjgmnCmK2YvmiPaK4J5L-bLeO9Zh0rbqsHmd8z0hQkiqXjWHXFEqWtofNX9uEzhvi59XqNwBWqc4mMEHXx5QHNEqRodmWFIMceWtCSguxcYJkBkLJORnfBfz2pdasSY5bywyKUEuaDAZHIpzlYT902hsiSl_Rr9M8M4UX6vVZOO7NXrUHmMI8fdmJFMKTOtSharAkm012nYxdHJ5gy_OviH2EWUbE7xpDkYTMrzdn8fNj4sv38-_4uuby6vzs2tsOZMFm0GAaEerhq6VA_SDIOCIaI2gZpTSWid6AEJ7kJy7XnLLmHCtJAYkU8rx4-Zkp1t_6udSt9KTzxZCMDPEJWvWEdUzxiip6If_0Pu4pLlOVykpaMuk7CrFdpRNMecEo14nP5n0oCnRm5z1Lmddc9bbnDWrTe_30sswgfvX8hhsBfgOyLU0ryA9eT8j-xeOwrbb</recordid><startdate>20230901</startdate><enddate>20230901</enddate><creator>Kim, Boram</creator><creator>Hong, Seok-In</creator><creator>Kim, Youn-Jung</creator><creator>Cho, Yeon Joo</creator><creator>Kim, Won Young</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8642-6552</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230901</creationdate><title>Predicting the probability of good neurological outcome after in-hospital cardiac arrest based on prearrest factors: validation of the good outcome following attempted resuscitation 2 (GO-FAR 2) score</title><author>Kim, Boram ; Hong, Seok-In ; Kim, Youn-Jung ; Cho, Yeon Joo ; Kim, Won Young</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-ab5e54fc7b846be9b50ed054a51af66ccd59ee019e633d963c225d460ae6277d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Cardiac arrest</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>EM - Original</topic><topic>Heart</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kim, Boram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hong, Seok-In</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Youn-Jung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Yeon Joo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Won Young</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health &amp; Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Internal and emergency medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kim, Boram</au><au>Hong, Seok-In</au><au>Kim, Youn-Jung</au><au>Cho, Yeon Joo</au><au>Kim, Won Young</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Predicting the probability of good neurological outcome after in-hospital cardiac arrest based on prearrest factors: validation of the good outcome following attempted resuscitation 2 (GO-FAR 2) score</atitle><jtitle>Internal and emergency medicine</jtitle><stitle>Intern Emerg Med</stitle><addtitle>Intern Emerg Med</addtitle><date>2023-09-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1807</spage><epage>1813</epage><pages>1807-1813</pages><issn>1828-0447</issn><issn>1970-9366</issn><eissn>1970-9366</eissn><abstract>The Good Outcome Following Attempted Resuscitation (GO-FAR) 2 score is a prognostic tool developed to support decision-making for do-not-attempt-resuscitation (DNAR) orders by predicting neurological outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) based on prearrest variables. However, this scoring system requires further validation. We aimed to validate the GO-FAR 2 score for predicting good neurological outcome in Korean patients with IHCA. A single-centre registry of adult patients with IHCA from 2013 to 2017 was analysed. The primary outcome was discharge with good neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2). The patients were divided into four categories according to the GO-FAR 2 score: very poor (≥ 5), poor (2–4), average (− 3 to 1), and above-average (&lt; − 3) likelihood of good neurological outcome. Of 1,011 patients (median age, 65 years), 63.1% were men. The rate of good neurological outcome was 16.0%. The proportions of patients categorised as having very poor, poor, average, and above-average probability of good neurological outcome were 3.9%, 18.3%, 70.2%, and 7.6%, respectively. In each category, good neurological outcome was observed in 0%, 1.1%, 16.8%, and 53.2%, respectively. Among patients in below-average categories (very poor + poor, GO-FAR 2 score ≥ 2), only 0.9% had good outcome. GO-FAR 2 score ≥ 2 showed a sensitivity of 98.8% and a negative predictive value of 99.1% in predicting good neurological outcome. The GO-FAR 2 score can predict neurological outcome after IHCA. In particular, GO-FAR 2 score ≥ 2 may support decision-making for DNAR orders.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>37115419</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11739-023-03271-2</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8642-6552</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1828-0447
ispartof Internal and emergency medicine, 2023-09, Vol.18 (6), p.1807-1813
issn 1828-0447
1970-9366
1970-9366
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2807922210
source Springer Nature:Jisc Collections:Springer Nature Read and Publish 2023-2025: Springer Reading List
subjects Cardiac arrest
Decision making
EM - Original
Heart
Internal Medicine
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
title Predicting the probability of good neurological outcome after in-hospital cardiac arrest based on prearrest factors: validation of the good outcome following attempted resuscitation 2 (GO-FAR 2) score
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-22T18%3A47%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Predicting%20the%20probability%20of%20good%20neurological%20outcome%20after%20in-hospital%20cardiac%20arrest%20based%20on%20prearrest%20factors:%20validation%20of%20the%20good%20outcome%20following%20attempted%20resuscitation%202%20(GO-FAR%202)%20score&rft.jtitle=Internal%20and%20emergency%20medicine&rft.au=Kim,%20Boram&rft.date=2023-09-01&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1807&rft.epage=1813&rft.pages=1807-1813&rft.issn=1828-0447&rft.eissn=1970-9366&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11739-023-03271-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2865142668%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-ab5e54fc7b846be9b50ed054a51af66ccd59ee019e633d963c225d460ae6277d3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2865142668&rft_id=info:pmid/37115419&rfr_iscdi=true