The accuracy of trained nurses in pre-operative health assessment: results of the OPEN study

被引:47
作者
van Klei, WA [1 ]
Hennis, PJ [1 ]
Moen, J [1 ]
Kalkman, CJ [1 ]
Moons, KGM [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Perioperat Care & Emergency Med, NL-3508 GA Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
anaesthesia; pre-operative assessment; manpower; anaesthetists; nurses;
D O I
10.1111/j.1365-2044.2004.03858.x
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
We quantified the accuracy of trained nurses to correctly assess the pre-operative health status of surgical patients as compared to anaesthetists. The study included 4540 adult surgical patients. Patients' health status was first assessed by the nurse and subsequently by the anaesthetist. Both needed to answer the question: 'is this patient ready for surgery without additional work-up, Yes/No?' (primary outcome). The secondary outcome was the time required to complete the assessment. Anaesthetists and nurses were blinded for each other's results. The anaesthetists' result was the reference standard. In 87% of the patients, the classifications by nurses and anaesthetists were similar. The sensitivity of the nurses' assessment was 83% (95% CI: 79-87%) and the specificity 87% (95% CI: 86-88%). In 1.3% (95% CI: 1.0-1.6%) of patients, nurses classified patients as 'ready' whereas anaesthetists did not. Nurses required 1.85 (95% CI: 1.80-1.90) times longer than anaesthetists. By allowing nurses to serve as a diagnostic filter to identify the subgroup of patients who may safely undergo surgery without further diagnostic workup or optimisation, anaesthetists can focus on patients who require additional attention before surgery.
引用
收藏
页码:971 / 978
页数:8
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]   The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: Explanation and elaboration [J].
Bossuyt, PM ;
Reitsma, JB ;
Bruns, DE ;
Gatsonis, CA ;
Glasziou, PP ;
Irwig, LM ;
Moher, D ;
Rennie, D ;
de Vet, HCW ;
Lijmer, JG .
CLINICAL CHEMISTRY, 2003, 49 (01) :7-18
[2]   Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative [J].
Bossuyt, PM ;
Reitsma, JB ;
Bruns, DE ;
Gatsonis, CA ;
Glasziou, PP ;
Irwig, LM ;
Lijmer, JG ;
Moher, D ;
Rennie, D ;
de Vet, HCW .
CLINICAL CHEMISTRY, 2003, 49 (01) :1-6
[3]   Randomised comparisons of medical tests: sometimes invalid, not always efficient [J].
Bossuyt, PMM ;
Lijmer, JG ;
Mol, BWJ .
LANCET, 2000, 356 (9244) :1844-1847
[4]   Development and effectiveness of an anesthesia preoperative evaluation clinic in a teaching hospital [J].
Fischer, SP .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1996, 85 (01) :196-206
[5]   Study design development, for concurrent assessment, and implementation of new diagnostic imaging technology [J].
Hunink, MGM ;
Krestin, GP .
RADIOLOGY, 2002, 222 (03) :604-614
[6]   Effectiveness of appropriately trained nurses in preoperative assessment: randomised controlled equivalence/non-inferiority trial [J].
Kinley, H ;
Czoski-Murray, C ;
George, S ;
McCabe, C ;
Primrose, J ;
Reilly, C ;
Wood, R ;
Nicolson, P ;
Healy, C ;
Read, S ;
Norman, J ;
Janke, E ;
Alhameed, H ;
Fernandes, N ;
Thomas, E .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 325 (7376) :1323-1326
[7]   Randomised controlled trial of nurse practitioner versus general practitioner care for patients requesting "same day" consultations in primary care [J].
Kinnersley, P ;
Anderson, E ;
Parry, K ;
Clement, J ;
Archard, L ;
Turton, P ;
Stainthorpe, A ;
Fraser, A ;
Butler, CC ;
Rogers, C .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7241) :1043-1048
[8]  
Koay CB, 1996, ANN ROY COLL SURG, V78, P15
[9]   Diagnostic studies as multivariable, prediction research [J].
Moons, KGM ;
Grobbee, DE .
JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH, 2002, 56 (05) :337-338
[10]   When should we remain blind and when should our eyes remain open in diagnostic studies? [J].
Moons, KGM ;
Grobbee, DE .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2002, 55 (07) :633-636