Catherine M Kuza1, George Hatzakis1, Jeffry T Nahmias2,3. 1. From the Department of Anesthesiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 2. Department of Surgery, Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, Massachusetts. 3. University of California, Irvine, Orange, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status (PS) classification system assesses the preoperative health of patients. Previous studies demonstrated poor interrater reliability and variable ASA PS scores, especially in trauma scenarios. There are few studies that evaluated the assignment of ASA PS scores in trauma patients and no studies that evaluated ASA PS assignment in severely injured adult polytrauma patients. Our objective was to assess interrater reliability and identify sources of discrepancy among anesthesiologists and trauma surgeons in designating ASA PS scores to adult polytrauma patients. METHODS: A link to an online survey containing questions assessing attitudes regarding ASA PS classification, demographic information, and 8 fictional trauma cases was e-mailed to anesthesiologists and trauma surgeons. The participants were asked to assign an ASA PS score to each scenario and explain their choice. Rater-versus-reference and interrater reliability, beyond that expected by chance, among respondents was analyzed using the Fleiss kappa analysis. RESULTS: A total of 349 participants completed the survey. All 8 cases had inconsistent ASA PS scores; several cases had scores ranging from I to VI and variable emergency (E) designations. Using weighted kappa (Kw) analysis for a subset of 201 respondents (101 trauma surgeons [S] and 100 anesthesiologists [A]), we found moderate (Kw = 0.63; SE = 0.024; 95% confidence interval, 0.594-0.666; P < .001) interrater-versus-reference reliability. The interrater reliability was fair (Kw = 0.43; SE = 0.037; 95% confidence interval, 0.360-0.491; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates fair interrater reliability beyond that expected by chance of the ASA PS scores among anesthesiologists and trauma surgeons when assessing adult polytrauma patients. Although the ASA PS is used in some trauma risk stratification models, discrepancies of ASA PS scores assigned to trauma cases exist. Future modifications of the ASA PS guidelines should aim to improve the interrater reliability of ASA PS scores in trauma patients. Further studies are warranted to determine the value of the ASA PS score as a trauma prognostic metric.
BACKGROUND: The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status (PS) classification system assesses the preoperative health of patients. Previous studies demonstrated poor interrater reliability and variable ASA PS scores, especially in trauma scenarios. There are few studies that evaluated the assignment of ASA PS scores in traumapatients and no studies that evaluated ASA PS assignment in severely injured adult polytraumapatients. Our objective was to assess interrater reliability and identify sources of discrepancy among anesthesiologists and trauma surgeons in designating ASA PS scores to adult polytraumapatients. METHODS: A link to an online survey containing questions assessing attitudes regarding ASA PS classification, demographic information, and 8 fictional trauma cases was e-mailed to anesthesiologists and trauma surgeons. The participants were asked to assign an ASA PS score to each scenario and explain their choice. Rater-versus-reference and interrater reliability, beyond that expected by chance, among respondents was analyzed using the Fleiss kappa analysis. RESULTS: A total of 349 participants completed the survey. All 8 cases had inconsistent ASA PS scores; several cases had scores ranging from I to VI and variable emergency (E) designations. Using weighted kappa (Kw) analysis for a subset of 201 respondents (101 trauma surgeons [S] and 100 anesthesiologists [A]), we found moderate (Kw = 0.63; SE = 0.024; 95% confidence interval, 0.594-0.666; P < .001) interrater-versus-reference reliability. The interrater reliability was fair (Kw = 0.43; SE = 0.037; 95% confidence interval, 0.360-0.491; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates fair interrater reliability beyond that expected by chance of the ASA PS scores among anesthesiologists and trauma surgeons when assessing adult polytraumapatients. Although the ASA PS is used in some trauma risk stratification models, discrepancies of ASA PS scores assigned to trauma cases exist. Future modifications of the ASA PS guidelines should aim to improve the interrater reliability of ASA PS scores in traumapatients. Further studies are warranted to determine the value of the ASA PS score as a trauma prognostic metric.
Authors: Seshadri C Mudumbai; Suzann Pershing; Thomas Bowe; Robin N Kamal; Erika D Sears; Andrea K Finlay; Dan Eisenberg; Mary T Hawn; Yingjie Weng; Amber W Trickey; Edward R Mariano; Alex H S Harris Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-11-21 Impact factor: 2.655