Sharad Manaktala1, Todd Rockwood2, Terrence J Adam1. 1. Minneapolis VA Healthcare System, University of Minnesota ; Institute for Health Informatics, University of Minnesota ; College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota. 2. Health Services Research and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To better characterize patient understanding of their risk of cardiac complications from non-cardiac surgery and to develop a patient driven clinical decision support system for preoperative patient risk management. METHODS: A patient-driven preoperative self-assessment decision support tool for perioperative assessment was created. Patient' self-perception of cardiac risk and self-report data for risk factors were compared with gold standard preoperative physician assessment to evaluate agreement. RESULTS: The patient generated cardiac risk profile was used for risk score generation and had excellent agreement with the expert physician assessment. However, patient subjective self-perception risk of cardiovascular complications had poor agreement with expert assessment. CONCLUSION: A patient driven cardiac risk assessment tool provides a high degree of agreement with expert provider assessment demonstrating clinical feasibility. The limited agreement between provider risk assessment and patient self-perception underscores a need for further work including focused preoperative patient education on cardiac risk.
OBJECTIVES: To better characterize patient understanding of their risk of cardiac complications from non-cardiac surgery and to develop a patient driven clinical decision support system for preoperative patient risk management. METHODS: A patient-driven preoperative self-assessment decision support tool for perioperative assessment was created. Patient' self-perception of cardiac risk and self-report data for risk factors were compared with gold standard preoperative physician assessment to evaluate agreement. RESULTS: The patient generated cardiac risk profile was used for risk score generation and had excellent agreement with the expert physician assessment. However, patient subjective self-perception risk of cardiovascular complications had poor agreement with expert assessment. CONCLUSION: A patient driven cardiac risk assessment tool provides a high degree of agreement with expert provider assessment demonstrating clinical feasibility. The limited agreement between provider risk assessment and patient self-perception underscores a need for further work including focused preoperative patient education on cardiac risk.
Authors: Yuji Okura; Lynn H Urban; Douglas W Mahoney; Steven J Jacobsen; Richard J Rodeheffer Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Lee A Fleisher; Joshua A Beckman; Kenneth A Brown; Hugh Calkins; Elliot L Chaikof; Kirsten E Fleischmann; William K Freeman; James B Froehlich; Edward K Kasper; Judy R Kersten; Barbara Riegel; John F Robb Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-11-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jayakeerthi Y Rao; M C Yeriswamy; M J Santhosh; Gurappa G Shetty; Kiron Varghese; Chandrakant B Patil; Shamanna S Iyengar Journal: Indian Heart J Date: 2012-04-28
Authors: Xiaoqian Jiang; Aziz A Boxwala; Robert El-Kareh; Jihoon Kim; Lucila Ohno-Machado Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012-04-04 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Marjolein Lugtenberg; Judith M Zegers-van Schaick; Gert P Westert; Jako S Burgers Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2009-08-12 Impact factor: 7.327