Association of a Novel Electronic Form for Preoperative Cardiac Risk Assessment With Reduction in Cardiac Consultations and Testing: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Mandeep Kumar, Kathryn Wilkinson, Ya-Huei Li, Rohit Masih, Mehak Gandhi, Haleh Saadat, Julie Culmone
{"title":"Association of a Novel Electronic Form for Preoperative Cardiac Risk Assessment With Reduction in Cardiac Consultations and Testing: Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Mandeep Kumar, Kathryn Wilkinson, Ya-Huei Li, Rohit Masih, Mehak Gandhi, Haleh Saadat, Julie Culmone","doi":"10.2196/63076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Preoperative cardiac risk assessment is an integral part of preoperative evaluation; however, there is significant variation among providers, leading to inappropriate referrals for cardiology consultation or excessive low-value cardiac testing. We implemented a novel electronic medical record (EMR) form in our preoperative clinics to decrease variation.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the impact of the EMR form on the preoperative utilization of cardiology consultation and cardiac diagnostic testing (echocardiograms, stress tests, and cardiac catheterization) and evaluate postoperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients who underwent outpatient preoperative evaluation prior to an elective surgery over 2 years were divided into 2 cohorts: from July 1, 2021, to June 30, 2022 (pre-EMR form implementation), and from July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2023 (post-EMR form implementation). Demographics, comorbidities, resource utilization, and surgical characteristics were analyzed. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for differences between the 2 cohorts. The primary outcomes were the utilization of preoperative cardiology consultation, cardiac testing, and 30-day postoperative major adverse cardiac events (MACE).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 25,484 patients met the inclusion criteria. Propensity score matching yielded 11,645 well-matched pairs. The post-EMR form, matched cohort had lower cardiology consultation (pre-EMR form: n=2698, 23.2% vs post-EMR form: n=2088, 17.9%; P<.001) and echocardiogram (pre-EMR form: n=808, 6.9% vs post-EMR form: n=591, 5.1%; P<.001) utilization. There were no significant differences in the 30-day postoperative outcomes, including MACE (all P>.05). While patients with \"possible indications\" for cardiology consultation had higher MACE rates, the consultations did not reduce MACE risk. Most algorithm end points, except for active cardiac conditions, had MACE rates <1%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this cohort study, preoperative cardiac risk assessment using a novel EMR form was associated with a significant decrease in cardiology consultation and testing utilization, with no adverse impact on postoperative outcomes. Adopting this approach may assist perioperative medicine clinicians and anesthesiologists in efficiently decreasing unnecessary preoperative resource utilization without compromising patient safety or quality of care.</p>","PeriodicalId":73557,"journal":{"name":"JMIR perioperative medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11437228/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR perioperative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/63076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Preoperative cardiac risk assessment is an integral part of preoperative evaluation; however, there is significant variation among providers, leading to inappropriate referrals for cardiology consultation or excessive low-value cardiac testing. We implemented a novel electronic medical record (EMR) form in our preoperative clinics to decrease variation.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the impact of the EMR form on the preoperative utilization of cardiology consultation and cardiac diagnostic testing (echocardiograms, stress tests, and cardiac catheterization) and evaluate postoperative outcomes.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients who underwent outpatient preoperative evaluation prior to an elective surgery over 2 years were divided into 2 cohorts: from July 1, 2021, to June 30, 2022 (pre-EMR form implementation), and from July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2023 (post-EMR form implementation). Demographics, comorbidities, resource utilization, and surgical characteristics were analyzed. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for differences between the 2 cohorts. The primary outcomes were the utilization of preoperative cardiology consultation, cardiac testing, and 30-day postoperative major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

Results: A total of 25,484 patients met the inclusion criteria. Propensity score matching yielded 11,645 well-matched pairs. The post-EMR form, matched cohort had lower cardiology consultation (pre-EMR form: n=2698, 23.2% vs post-EMR form: n=2088, 17.9%; P<.001) and echocardiogram (pre-EMR form: n=808, 6.9% vs post-EMR form: n=591, 5.1%; P<.001) utilization. There were no significant differences in the 30-day postoperative outcomes, including MACE (all P>.05). While patients with "possible indications" for cardiology consultation had higher MACE rates, the consultations did not reduce MACE risk. Most algorithm end points, except for active cardiac conditions, had MACE rates <1%.

Conclusions: In this cohort study, preoperative cardiac risk assessment using a novel EMR form was associated with a significant decrease in cardiology consultation and testing utilization, with no adverse impact on postoperative outcomes. Adopting this approach may assist perioperative medicine clinicians and anesthesiologists in efficiently decreasing unnecessary preoperative resource utilization without compromising patient safety or quality of care.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新型术前心脏风险评估电子表格与减少心脏咨询和检测的关系:回顾性队列研究
背景:术前心脏风险评估是术前评估不可或缺的一部分;然而,医疗服务提供者之间存在很大差异,导致不适当的心脏科会诊转诊或过多的低价值心脏测试。我们在术前门诊采用了一种新型电子病历(EMR)表格,以减少差异:本研究旨在调查电子病历表对术前心脏病咨询和心脏诊断检查(超声心动图、负荷试验和心导管检查)使用的影响,并评估术后结果:方法: 我们进行了一项回顾性队列研究。将两年内择期手术前接受门诊术前评估的患者分为两组:2021 年 7 月 1 日至 2022 年 6 月 30 日(EMR 表格实施前)和 2022 年 7 月 1 日至 2023 年 6 月 30 日(EMR 表格实施后)。对人口统计学、合并症、资源利用率和手术特征进行了分析。采用倾向得分匹配法来调整两个队列之间的差异。主要结果是术前心脏病咨询、心脏检测的使用情况以及术后 30 天的主要心脏不良事件(MACE):共有 25,484 名患者符合纳入标准。倾向得分匹配产生了 11,645 对匹配良好的患者。EMR表格后的匹配队列中,心脏科就诊率较低(EMR表格前:n=2698,23.2% vs EMR表格后:n=2088,17.9%;P.05)。虽然有 "可能指征 "进行心脏病会诊的患者的 MACE 发生率较高,但会诊并未降低 MACE 风险。除活动性心脏病外,大多数算法终点都有 MACE 发生率 结论:在这项队列研究中,使用新型 EMR 表单进行术前心脏风险评估可显著减少心脏科会诊和检查的使用,但对术后结果没有不利影响。采用这种方法可帮助围手术期医学临床医师和麻醉医师有效减少不必要的术前资源使用,同时不影响患者安全或护理质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Blood Bonds: Transforming Blood Donation Through Innovation, Inclusion, and Engagement. Use of Biofeedback-Based Virtual Reality in Pediatric Perioperative and Postoperative Settings: Observational Study. Association of a Novel Electronic Form for Preoperative Cardiac Risk Assessment With Reduction in Cardiac Consultations and Testing: Retrospective Cohort Study. Gamified Mobile App (MobERAS) for Telemonitoring Patients in the Postoperative Period Based on the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Program: Development and Validation Study. Preoperative Anesthesia Virtual Video Consultations in a Preadmission Clinic: Quality Improvement Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1