Cooperman's scheme was more accurate than Goldman's Multifactorial Index of Cardiac Risk for assessing cardiovascular risk in patients undergoing vascular surgery.
Cohort (n=100)
Patients undergoing vascular surgery (n=100)
Cooperman's scheme vs Goldman's Multifactorial Index of Cardiac Risk
Accuracy in assessing patient cardiovascular risk
Various attempts have made been made to quantify the cardiovascular risk factors associated with anaesthesia and surgery. Two such schemes are the "Multifactorial Index of Cardiac Risk" developed by Goldman et al., and the one devised by Cooperman et al. The validity of these two schemes in relation to anaesthesia for vascular surgery was investigated by carrying out a prospective study of 100 patients. Cooperman's scheme was found to be much more accurate than Goldman's scheme in assessing patient risk. The study confirms the impression that the vascular patient falls into a higher risk group than most other surgical patients with regard to cardiovascular complications.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
C. M. Domaingue
St Vincent's Hospital
Melanie J. Davies
Royal Australian College of General Practitioners
Keith D. Cronin
St. Vincent's Hospital
Anaesthesia and Intensive Care
St. Vincent's Hospital
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Domaingue et al. (Mon,) conducted a cohort in Patients undergoing vascular surgery (n=100). Cooperman's scheme vs. Goldman's Multifactorial Index of Cardiac Risk was evaluated on Accuracy in assessing patient cardiovascular risk. Cooperman's scheme was more accurate than Goldman's Multifactorial Index of Cardiac Risk for assessing cardiovascular risk in patients undergoing vascular surgery.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a157c4779ff98d0de4eb377 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057x8201000405
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: