Preoperative patient evaluation

Roizen, Michael F.

doi:10.1007/bf03005321

Cited by 39 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…6 He pointed out that , not including the cost of specialist interpretation. In some instances, CMS and insurers will not reimburse for repeat testing and for tests based on age alone, placing the burden of payment on the patient.…”

Section: Preoperative Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These conclusions agree with the findings of the Chicago group that at least 60% of tests performed routinely preoperatively are useless as regards the need for gathering relevant information prior to an operation. 5,6 Another investigation, published in 1991, evaluated the ability of preoperative laboratory testing to predict postoperative complications. 8 Data collected from 520 patients undergoing elective surgery included American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) risk classification, body mass index, electrolyte values (including glucose), BUN/Cr values, blood counts, coagulation studies, total protein/albumin/lymphocyte count, EKG, chest x-ray, urinalysis, pulmonary function tests, type of anesthesia, and operation.…”

Section: Preoperative Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Integrating Perioperative Information From Divergent Sources

Frost

2012

Mount Sinai J Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The enormous diversity of physician practices, including specialists, and patient requirements and comorbidities make integration of appropriate perioperative information difficult. Lack of communicating computer systems adds to the difficulty of assembling data. Meta analysis and evidence‐based studies indicate that far too many tests are performed perioperatively. Guidelines for appropriate perioperative management have been formulated by several specialties. Education as to current findings and requirements should be better communicated to surgeons, consultants, and patients to improve healthcare needs and at the same time decrease costs. Means to better communication by interpersonal collaboration are outlined. Mt Sinai J Med 79:3–12, 2012. © 2012 Mount Sinai School of Medicine

show abstract

Section: Preoperative Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Preoperative Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Perioperative Information From Divergent Sources

Frost

2012

Mount Sinai J Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(2) If tbere are advantages, why is it taking us so long to implement these strategies? Is it the millieu in which testing is ordered or is it because the advantages to providers aren't as great as the advantages to society?…”

Section: Editorialmentioning

confidence: 99%

The compelling rationale for less preoperative testing

Roizen

1988

Can J Anaesth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…URRENT literature has consistently demonstrated that 'routine' preoperative testing has little, if any, impact on perioperative outcomes particularly in asymptomatic patients undergoing low-risk ambulatory surgery. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] Many suggest that such 'routine' testing can be completely eliminated while others advocate a 'selected' or 'indicated' testing based upon the patient's medical status. Different jurisdictions have developed different institutional policies regarding preoperative evaluation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%