IntroductionFrailty is associated with adverse surgical outcomes. While existing studies describe the prevalence of multimorbidity and frailty in the community, the surgical population may have more severe disease and significant surgical stress. This study aims to describe the distribution of frailty and multimorbidity in the older surgical population and examine if specific comorbidities are more strongly associated with frailty. MethodsThis is a single-centre retrospective cohort study using an electronic database in the preoperative evaluation clinic, conducted in Singapore General Hospital, Singapore. All patients above 70 years old going for elective non-cardiac surgery were included. Demographics and comorbidities were analysed for their association with frailty according to the Edmonton Frail Scale. ResultsA total of 1396 out of 1398 patients were analyzed. The overall incidence of frailty was 27.8% and multimorbidity was 63.4%. Factors independently associated with frailty were age (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] = 1.07), female gender (aOR = 1.67), type 2 diabetes mellitus (aOR = 1.69), chronic kidney disease (aOR = 1.47), end-stage renal failure (aOR = 3.58), history of cerebrovascular accident or transient ischemic attack (aOR = 1.87), moderate anaemia (aOR = 2.11), dementia (aOR = 6.38), depression (aOR = 3.82), and peptic ulcer disease (aOR = 1.98). The presence of multi-morbidity was significantly associated with frailty, with overall increasing strength of association. ConclusionAs the number of comorbidities increases, the odds of frailty increase. Only a small proportion of those with multimorbidity accumulate enough biological deficits to develop frailty, putting them at higher risk than with solely multimorbidity or frailty. Dementia and depression are comorbidities with strong associations that have yet to see coordinated interventional efforts in the preoperative setting.

The American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (ASA) is used for communication of patient health status, risk scoring, benchmarking and financial claims. Prior studies using hypothetical scenarios have shown poor concordance of ASA classification among healthcare providers. There is a paucity of studies using clinical data, and of clinical factors or patient outcomes associated with discordant classification. The study aims to assess ASA classification concordance between surgeons and anesthesiologists, factors surrounding discordance and its impact on patient outcomes. This retrospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary medical center on 46,284 consecutive patients undergoing elective surgery between January 2017 and December 2019. The ASA class showed moderate concordance (weighted Cohen’s κ 0.53) between surgeons and anesthesiologists. We found significant associations between discordant classification and patient comorbidities, age and race. Patients with discordant classification had a higher risk of 30-day mortality (odds ratio (OR) 2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.52–2.62, p < 0.0001), 1-year mortality (OR 1.53, 95% CI = 1.38–1.69, p < 0.0001), and Intensive Care Unit admission > 24 h (OR 1.69, 95% CI = 1.47–1.94, p < 0.0001). Hence, there is a need for improved standardization of ASA scoring and cross-specialty review in ASA-discordant cases.

The American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (ASA) is used for communication of patient health status, risk scoring, benchmarking and financial claims. Prior studies using hypothetical scenarios have shown poor concordance of ASA classification among healthcare providers. There is a paucity of studies using clinical data, and of clinical factors or patient outcomes associated with discordant classification. The study aims to assess ASA classification concordance between surgeons and anesthesiologists, factors surrounding discordance and its impact on patient outcomes. This retrospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary medical center on 46284 consecutive patients undergoing elective surgery between January 2017 and December 2019. The ASA class showed moderate concordance (weighted Cohen’s 𝜅 0.53) between surgeons and anesthesiologists. We found significant associations between discordant classification and patient comorbidities, age and race. Patients with discordant classification had a higher risk of 30-day mortality (odds ratio (OR) 2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.52-2.62, p<0.0001), 1-year mortality (OR 1.53, 95% CI = 1.38-1.69, p < 0.0001), and Intensive Care Unit admission >24 hours (OR 1.69, 95% CI = 1.47-1.94, p< 0.0001). Hence, there is a need for improved standardization of ASA scoring and cross-specialty review in ASA-discordant cases.

No abstract

BackgroundThe American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (ASA) score is used for communication of patient health status, risk scoring, benchmarking and financial claims. Prior studies using hypothetical scenarios have shown poor concordance of ASA scoring among healthcare providers. However, there is a paucity of concordance studies using real-world data, as well as studies of clinical factors or patient outcomes associated with discordant scoring. The study aims to assess real-world ASA score concordance between surgeons and anesthesiologists, factors surrounding discordance and its impact on patient outcomes. MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary academic medical center on 46284 consecutive patients undergoing elective surgery between January 2017 and December 2019. ASA scores entered by surgeons and anesthesiologists, patient demographics, and post-operative outcomes were collected. We assessed the concordance of preoperative ASA scoring between surgeons and anesthesiologists, clinical factors associated with score discordance, the impact of score discordance on clinically important outcomes, and the discriminative ability of the two scores for 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Statistical tests used included Cohen’s weighted 𝜅 score, chi-square test, t-test, unadjusted odds ratios and logistic regression models. ResultsThe ASA score showed moderate concordance (weighted Cohen’s 𝜅 0.53) between surgeons and anesthesiologists. 15098 patients (32.6%) had discordant scores, of which 11985 (79.4%) were scored lower by surgeons. We found significant associations between discordant scores and anesthesiologist-assessed comorbidities, patient age and race. Patients with discordant scores had a higher risk of 30-day mortality (odds ratio 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.52-2.62, p<0.0001), 1-year mortality (odds ratio 1.53, 95% CI = 1.38-1.69, p < 0.0001), and ICU admission >24 hours (odds ratio 1.69, 95% CI = 1.47-1.94, p< 0.0001), and stratified analyses showed a trend towards higher risk when the surgeons’ ASA score was lower. ConclusionsThere is moderate concordance between surgeons and anesthesiologists in assigning the ASA classification. Discordant ASA scores are associated with adverse patient outcomes. Hence, there is a need for improved standardization of ASA scoring and cross-specialty review in ASA-discordant cases.