Adherence on Recommended Guidelines for Pre-Operative Routine Investigations in ASA (American Society of Anaesthesiologists) Grade 1 and 2 by Anaesthesiologists working at Tertiary Care Hospitals in the Province of Sindh

Ayub, Hannan; Zaid, Muhammad; Siddiqui, Muhammad Saeed; Javed, Sana

doi:10.53350/pjmhs22168311

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grading system is widely acknowledged as a valuable tool for evaluating the pre-anaesthesia medical co-morbidities of patients [ 9 ]. It plays a vital role in assessing perioperative risks and can be utilized in conjunction with other factors, including the type of surgery, frailty, and level of deconditioning, to determine the most suitable care approach.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictive Value of Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment Scores for Mortality in Patients With Hip Fracture: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Zaib,

Madni,

Saad Azhar

2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To assess the predictive value of three scoring systems, namely the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and the Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS), in predicting mortality among patients with hip fractures. Materials and methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 628 participants aged 60 years and above who sought treatment at a UK hospital between January 2018 and December 2018. Data on age, gender, mortality, and assessment scores were collected. The area under the curve was calculated for each receiver operator characteristic (ROC). Cross-tabulation was performed to examine the association between various assessment scores and mortality using the chi-square test. ResultsThe mean age was 80.80±11.18 years. Females were 408 (64.97%). Higher CFS (p<0.001) and NHFS (p<0.001) scores were significantly associated with mortality, while the ASA score did not show a significant association (p=0.225). The calculated area under the curve (AUC) values were as follows: 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65 to 0.76) for CFS, 0.46 (95% CI: 0.39 to 0.53) for NHFS, and 0.41 (95% CI: 0.34 to 0.48) for the ASA score. Utilizing a cut-off of ≥6 for CFS, 57 individuals (98.3%) in the 30-day mortality group were correctly identified. Similarly, the ROC analysis determined a ≥5 cut-off for NHFS accurately predicting 50 patients (86.2%) who deceased within 30 days. Applying an ASA ≥3 cut-off resulted in a predictive mortality rate of 56 (96.6%). The NHFS score demonstrated the highest predictive capability for mortality, with patients scoring ≥5 having a significantly higher risk of mortality compared to those with a score <5. ConclusionThis study showed robust correlations between high CFS (≥6) and NHFS (≥5), and mortality within the hip fracture patient cohort.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%