Sankar A, Johnson S R, Beattie W S, Tait G, Wijeysundera D N
Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Toronto Western Hospital, Mount Sinai Hospital, and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Br J Anaesth. 2014 Sep;113(3):424-32. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeu100. Epub 2014 Apr 11.
Previous studies, which relied on hypothetical cases and chart reviews, have questioned the inter-rater reliability of the ASA physical status (ASA-PS) scale. We therefore conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate its inter-rater reliability and validity in clinical practice.
The cohort included all adult patients (≥18 yr) who underwent elective non-cardiac surgery at a quaternary-care teaching institution in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, from March 2010 to December 2011. We assessed inter-rater reliability by comparing ASA-PS scores assigned at the preoperative assessment clinic vs the operating theatre. We also assessed the validity of the ASA-PS scale by measuring its association with patients' preoperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes.
The cohort included 10 864 patients, of whom 5.5% were classified as ASA I, 42.0% as ASA II, 46.7% as ASA III, and 5.8% as ASA IV. The ASA-PS score had moderate inter-rater reliability (κ 0.61), with 67.0% of patients (n=7279) being assigned to the same ASA-PS class in the clinic and operating theatre, and 98.6% (n=10 712) of paired assessments being within one class of each other. The ASA-PS scale was correlated with patients' age (Spearman's ρ, 0.23), Charlson comorbidity index (ρ=0.24), revised cardiac risk index (ρ=0.40), and hospital length of stay (ρ=0.16). It had moderate ability to predict in-hospital mortality (receiver-operating characteristic curve area 0.69) and cardiac complications (receiver-operating characteristic curve area 0.70).
Consistent with its inherent subjectivity, the ASA-PS scale has moderate inter-rater reliability in clinical practice. It also demonstrates validity as a marker of patients' preoperative health status.
以往依赖假设病例和病历回顾的研究对美国麻醉医师协会身体状况(ASA-PS)分级的评分者间信度提出了质疑。因此,我们进行了一项回顾性队列研究,以评估其在临床实践中的评分者间信度和效度。
该队列包括2010年3月至2011年12月在加拿大多伦多一家四级医疗教学机构接受择期非心脏手术的所有成年患者(≥18岁)。我们通过比较术前评估诊所与手术室给出的ASA-PS评分来评估评分者间信度。我们还通过测量ASA-PS分级与患者术前特征及术后结局的关联来评估其效度。
该队列包括10864例患者,其中5.5%被分类为ASA I级,42.0%为ASA II级,46.7%为ASA III级,5.8%为ASA IV级。ASA-PS评分具有中等评分者间信度(κ=0.61),67.0%的患者(n=7279)在诊所和手术室被归为同一ASA-PS级别,98.6%(n=10712)的配对评估结果相差不超过一个级别。ASA-PS分级与患者年龄(Spearman秩相关系数ρ=0.23)、Charlson合并症指数(ρ=0.24)、修订心脏风险指数(ρ=0.40)及住院时间(ρ=0.16)相关。它对院内死亡率(受试者工作特征曲线下面积0.69)和心脏并发症(受试者工作特征曲线下面积0.70)具有中等预测能力。
与ASA-PS分级固有的主观性一致,其在临床实践中具有中等评分者间信度。它也作为患者术前健康状况的一个指标显示出效度。