Reliability of the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status scale in clinical practice

Background Previous studies, which relied on hypothetical cases and chart reviews, have questioned the inter-rater reliability of the ASA physical status (ASA-PS) scale. We therefore conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate its inter-rater reliability and validity in clinical practice. Methods The cohort included all adult patients (≥18 yr) who underwent elective non-cardiac surgery at a quaternary-care teaching institution in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, from March 2010 to December 2011. We assessed inter-rater reliability by comparing ASA-PS scores assigned at the preoperative assessment clinic vs the operating theatre. We also assessed the validity of the ASA-PS scale by measuring its association with patients' preoperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes. Results The cohort included 10 864 patients, of whom 5.5% were classified as ASA I, 42.0% as ASA II, 46.7% as ASA III, and 5.8% as ASA IV. The ASA-PS score had moderate inter-rater reliability (κ 0.61), with 67.0% of patients (n=7279) being assigned to the same ASA-PS class in the clinic and operating theatre, and 98.6% (n=10 712) of paired assessments being within one class of each other. The ASA-PS scale was correlated with patients' age (Spearman's ρ, 0.23), Charlson comorbidity index (ρ=0.24), revised cardiac risk index (ρ=0.40), and hospital length of stay (ρ=0.16). It had moderate ability to predict in-hospital mortality (receiver-operating characteristic curve area 0.69) and cardiac complications (receiver-operating characteristic curve area 0.70). Conclusions Consistent with its inherent subjectivity, the ASA-PS scale has moderate inter-rater reliability in clinical practice. It also demonstrates validity as a marker of patients' preoperative health status.

[1]  Feng Qian,et al.  The Surgical Mortality Probability Model: Derivation and Validation of a Simple Risk Prediction Rule for Noncardiac Surgery , 2012, Annals of surgery.

[2]  P. Albaladéjo,et al.  American Society of Anesthesiologists’ Physical Status system: a multicentre Francophone study to analyse reasons for classification disagreement , 2011, European journal of anaesthesiology.

[3]  Xiang Fang,et al.  Development and Validation of a Risk Calculator for Prediction of Cardiac Risk After Surgery , 2011, Circulation.

[4]  E. Mascha,et al.  Development and Validation of a Risk Quantification Index for 30-Day Postoperative Mortality and Morbidity in Noncardiac Surgical Patients , 2011, Anesthesiology.

[5]  W. S. Beattie,et al.  Chronic &bgr; Blockade Is Associated with a Better Outcome after Elective Noncardiac Surgery than Acute &bgr; Blockade: A Single-center Propensity-matched Cohort Study , 2011, Anesthesiology.

[6]  O. Nafiu,et al.  Does an objective system-based approach improve assessment of perioperative risk in children? A preliminary evaluation of the 'NARCO'. , 2011, British journal of anaesthesia.

[7]  K. Saleh,et al.  American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status score may be used as a comorbidity index in hip fracture surgery. , 2010, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[8]  B. Feig,et al.  A pilot study evaluating predictors of postoperative outcomes after major abdominal surgery: physiological capacity compared with the ASA physical status classification system , 2010, British journal of anaesthesia.

[9]  C. Ko,et al.  Does Surgical Quality Improve in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: An Evaluation of All Participating Hospitals , 2009, Annals of surgery.

[10]  David R Flum,et al.  Blueprint for a new American College of Surgeons: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[11]  T. Eken,et al.  Pre-injury ASA physical status classification is an independent predictor of mortality after trauma. , 2007, The Journal of trauma.

[12]  Robert M Mentzer,et al.  National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Risk Factors Can Be Used to Validate American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (ASA PS) Levels , 2006, Annals of surgery.

[13]  H. Quan,et al.  Coding Algorithms for Defining Comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 Administrative Data , 2005, Medical care.

[14]  R. Figlin,et al.  Use of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification to assess perioperative risk in patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. , 2004, Urology.

[15]  Wendy L Aronson,et al.  Variability in the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status (PS) Classifcation Scale , 2003 .

[16]  M. Irwin,et al.  The ASA Physical Status Classification: Inter-observer Consistency , 2002, Anaesthesia and intensive care.

[17]  K Gilbert,et al.  Prospective Evaluation of Cardiac Risk Indices for Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery , 2000, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[18]  E F Cook,et al.  Derivation and prospective validation of a simple index for prediction of cardiac risk of major noncardiac surgery. , 1999, Circulation.

[19]  L. Henson,et al.  Unindicated preoperative testing: ASA physical status and financial implications. , 1997, Journal of clinical anesthesia.

[20]  S. Ranta,et al.  A survey of the ASA physical status classification: significant variation in allocation among Finnish anaesthesiologists , 1997, Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica.

[21]  A. Laupacis,et al.  Clinical prediction rules. A review and suggested modifications of methodological standards. , 1997, JAMA.

[22]  E Magi,et al.  ASA classification and perioperative variables as predictors of postoperative outcome. , 1997, British journal of anaesthesia.

[23]  C. McHorney,et al.  Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? , 1995, Quality of Life Research.

[24]  P. Lawler,et al.  An assessment of the consistency of ASA physical status classification allocation , 1995, Anaesthesia.

[25]  S. Greenfield,et al.  ASA Physical Status and Age Predict Morbidity After Three Surgical Procedures , 1994, Annals of surgery.

[26]  D. Streiner,et al.  Health Measurement Scales: A practical guide to thier development and use , 1989 .

[27]  E. Spitznagel,et al.  ASA Physical Status Classifications: A Study of Consistency of Ratings , 1978, Anesthesiology.

[28]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[29]  C. J. Vacanti,et al.  A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship of Physical Status to Postoperative Mortality in 68,388 Cases , 1970, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[30]  Meyer Saklad,et al.  GRADING OF PATIENTS FOR SURGICAL PROCEDURES , 1941 .

[31]  Ralf Dresner,et al.  Health Measurement Scales A Practical Guide To Their Development And Use , 2016 .

[32]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[33]  J. Smithjr.  Use of American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification to Assess Perioperative Risk in Patients Undergoing Radical Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma , 2005 .

[34]  M. McAuliffe,et al.  Variability in the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification Scale. , 2003, AANA journal.

[35]  C. Mackenzie,et al.  A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. , 1987, Journal of chronic diseases.