Key result
Perioperative cardiac risk scores show poor agreement among ACP, EMAPO, and RCRI systems.
Why the study?
The agreement between the three perioperative risk scores proposed by the II Guideline for Perioperative Evaluation of the Brazilian Society of Cardiology was unclear.
Cross-Sectional (n=401)
Effect estimate: kappa 0.270 (95% CI 0.222 to 0.318)
Variable risk classification across scores may affect perioperative decisions; leaves open need for standardized tools in non-cardiac surgery.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the agreement between the three scores proposed by the II Guideline for Perioperative Evaluation of the Brazilian Society of Cardiology (SBC): the American College of Physicians algorithm (ACP), the Multicenter Study of Perioperative Evaluation (EMAPO) and Lee's Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI). METHOD: Patients evaluated preoperatively for non-cardiac surgery by the anesthesiology service were classified as low, moderate or high-risk according to the 3 algorithms suggested by the II Guideline. To calculate the strength of agreement between the scores, the kappa agreement index was used. RESULTS: Four hundred and one patients were included in the sample. Cohen's kappa inter-rater agreement between scores was 0.270 (CI: 0.222 to 0.318), corresponding to a weak agreement. Analyzing in pairs, the best correlation was between EMAPO and ACP, with kappa = 0.327. Lee's score was the one that classified more patients as low-risk: 98.3%, while EMAPO and ACP classified as low risk 91.3% and 92.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: There is poor correlation among the risk scores proposed by the II Perioperative Evaluation Guideline of the SBC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Feitosa-Filho et al. (2016) conducted a cross-sectional in Preoperative evaluation for non-cardiac surgery (n=401). Perioperative risk scores (ACP, EMAPO, RCRI) was evaluated on Cohen's kappa inter-rater agreement between scores (kappa 0.270, 95% CI 0.222 to 0.318). Agreement among the ACP, EMAPO, and Lee's RCRI perioperative risk scores was weak (Cohen's kappa 0.270; 95% CI 0.222-0.318).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: