Inter-rater Reliability of Preoperative Mortality Risk Calculators

NCT ID: NCT06410183

Last Updated: 2024-06-12

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

34 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2019-02-01

Study Completion Date

2021-08-01

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The goal of this study is to investigate the inter-rater variability of mortality risk calculations for high-risk non-cardiac surgical patients. For this purpose patient information from health care files were used. Five anesthesiologists calculated the mortality risks with three calculators for 34 high-risk non-cardiac surgical patients. The patients were discussed in a preoperative multidisciplinary discussion in a large teaching hospital in The Netherlands.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Identifying high-risk patients for perioperative treatment and decision-making remains a challenge due to difficulty in reliably estimating morbidity and mortality risks. Assessing surgical risk helps allocating resources, obtaining informed consent, and making shared decisions with a multidisciplinary team (MDT). Multimorbidity is increasing globally in an ageing population with a growing burden of chronic diseases. It has been shown that high-risk non-cardiac surgical patients suffer disproportionally from perioperative complications. Preoperative mortality risk calculators are available and may help to identify high-risk non-cardiac surgical patients already before surgery, triggering efforts to lower the burden of possible complications, e.g., by extended monitoring or specified treatments. A systematic review suggested a significant risk of bias in developing current preoperative risk calculators due to lack of external validation, highlighting the need for enhanced performance and reliability to ensure their effectiveness in clinical practice. Low reliability and performance may, despite their general availability, be why that preoperative risk calculators are not yet consistently used in clinical practice. For daily clinical use, good predictive performance, low inter rater variability and user friendliness are essential. Discrepancies in predictor measurements can cause miscalibration, changes in discriminatory ability, and overall accuracy, leading to clinically relevant variability in risk calculator results. Previous studies have shown that physicians must trust a mortality risk calculator before utilization. High-risk patients suffer especially from complications, and it has been shown that the complications often result in death perioperatively. Therefore, adequate preoperative calculation of mortality risks and early recognition of high-risk non-cardiac surgical patients could benefit from reliable preoperative risk calculation. These high-risk patients can then be discussed in a preoperative multidisciplinary discussion to lower complications and perioperative deaths.

The current study evaluated the inter-rater reliability of calculating preoperative mortality risk scores for high-risk non-cardiac surgical patients in clinical practice among five anesthesiologists. The hypothesis was that the available risk calculators would show moderate to good reliability. For this purpose, five anesthesiologists used the following three risk calculators: the preoperative score to predict postoperative morbidity \[POSPOM, the American College of Surgeons surgical risk calculator, and the surgical outcome risk tool \[SORT\].

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Reliability

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

OTHER

Study Time Perspective

RETROSPECTIVE

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

no intervention

no intervention

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Patients discussed in a preoperative multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting.

Exclusion Criteria

* No complete patient file to calculate the mortality risks
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Utrecht University

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Amsterdam University Medical Centers (UMC), Location Academic Medical Center (AMC)

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Rijnstate Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Jacqueline E. Vernooij, MD, MA

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Rijnstate Hospital

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Rijnstate Hospital

Arnhem, Gelderland, Netherlands

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Netherlands

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2022-2161

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.