Murray John P, Tummala Sandeep, Chen Thomas, Aldrich Daniel, Reisner Alex, Martin Shannon K
Department of Hospital Medicine University of Chicago.
Brown J Hosp Med. 2023 Mar 1;2(2):72712. doi: 10.56305/001c.72712. eCollection 2023.
Review preoperative risk stratification encounters performed by a hospital medicine consult service at a tertiary academic medical center to better characterize practice patterns and evaluate the need to standardize our approach to risk assessment.
Retrospective chart review of 200 randomly selected patients representing approximately 40% of all patients seen by the hospital medicine consult service from 2019-2020.
Of the 200 charts reviewed, there were 71 preoperative risk assessments performed and 8 distinct approaches utilized. The most common risk stratification tool used was the Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI), followed by the American College of Surgeons-Surgical Risk Calculator (ACS-SRC) and then the Gupta Myocardial Infarction and Cardiac Arrest calculator. 19 encounters (27%) used multiple risk stratification tools, while 11 encounters (15%) were not consistent with American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines.
Significant heterogeneity exists within preoperative risk stratification practices in this single-center study. Follow-up work remains to promote standardization in approach and documentation.
回顾一家三级学术医疗中心医院内科会诊服务所进行的术前风险分层情况,以更好地描述实践模式,并评估规范我们的风险评估方法的必要性。
对200例随机选取的患者进行回顾性病历审查,这些患者约占2019年至2020年医院内科会诊服务所诊治的所有患者的40%。
在审查的200份病历中,进行了71次术前风险评估,采用了8种不同的方法。使用最频繁的风险分层工具是修订心脏风险指数(RCRI),其次是美国外科医师学会手术风险计算器(ACS-SRC),然后是古普塔心肌梗死和心脏骤停计算器。19次会诊(27%)使用了多种风险分层工具,而11次会诊(15%)不符合美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会指南。
在这项单中心研究中,术前风险分层实践存在显著异质性。后续工作仍需促进方法和记录的标准化。