2007 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines on perioperative cardiac evaluation are usually incorrectly applied by anesthesiology residents evaluating simulated patients

Michael M. Vigoda, Bobbiejean Sweitzer, Nikola Miljkovic, Kristopher L. Arheart, Shari Messinger, Keith Candiotti, David Lubarsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The 2007 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guidelines on Perioperative Cardiac Evaluation and Care for Noncardiac Surgery is the accepted standard for perioperative cardiac evaluation. Anesthesiology training programs are required to teach these algorithms. We estimated the percentage of residents nationwide who correctly applied suggested testing algorithms from the ACC/AHA guidelines when they evaluated simulated patients in common clinical scenarios. Methods: Anesthesiology resident volunteers at 24 training programs were presented with 6 scenarios characterized by surgical procedure, patient's risk factors, and patient's functional capacity. Scenarios and 5 possible recommendations per scenario were both presented in randomized orders. Senior anesthesiologists at 24 different United States training programs along with the first author of the 2007 ACC/AHA guidelines validated the appropriate recommendation to this web-based survey before distribution. Results: The 548 resident participants, representing 12% of anesthesiology trainees in the United States, included 48 PGY-1s (preliminary year before anesthesia training), 166 Clinical Anesthesia Year 1 (CA-1) residents, 161 CA-2s, and 173 CA-3s. For patients with an active cardiac condition, the upper 95% confidence bound for the percent of residents who recommended evaluations consistent with the guidelines was 78%. However, for the remaining 5 scenarios, the upper 95% confidence bound for the percent of residents with an appropriate recommendation was 46%. Conclusions: The results show that fewer than half of anesthesiology residents nationwide correctly demonstrate the approach considered the standard of care for preoperative cardiac evaluation. Further study is necessary to elucidate the correct intervention(s), such as use of decision support tools, increased clarity of guidelines for routine use, adjustment in educational programs, and/or greater familiarity of responsible faculty with the material.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)940-949
Number of pages10
JournalAnesthesia and Analgesia
Volume112
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Anesthesiology
Guidelines
American Heart Association
Cardiology
Education
Anesthesia
Social Adjustment
Standard of Care
Volunteers

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

2007 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines on perioperative cardiac evaluation are usually incorrectly applied by anesthesiology residents evaluating simulated patients. / Vigoda, Michael M.; Sweitzer, Bobbiejean; Miljkovic, Nikola; Arheart, Kristopher L.; Messinger, Shari; Candiotti, Keith; Lubarsky, David.

In: Anesthesia and Analgesia, Vol. 112, No. 4, 01.01.2011, p. 940-949.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Vigoda, Michael M. ; Sweitzer, Bobbiejean ; Miljkovic, Nikola ; Arheart, Kristopher L. ; Messinger, Shari ; Candiotti, Keith ; Lubarsky, David. / 2007 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines on perioperative cardiac evaluation are usually incorrectly applied by anesthesiology residents evaluating simulated patients. In: Anesthesia and Analgesia. 2011 ; Vol. 112, No. 4. pp. 940-949.
@article{8c2dadf823e748c99d4ab5f542deafbc,
title = "2007 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines on perioperative cardiac evaluation are usually incorrectly applied by anesthesiology residents evaluating simulated patients",
abstract = "Background: The 2007 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guidelines on Perioperative Cardiac Evaluation and Care for Noncardiac Surgery is the accepted standard for perioperative cardiac evaluation. Anesthesiology training programs are required to teach these algorithms. We estimated the percentage of residents nationwide who correctly applied suggested testing algorithms from the ACC/AHA guidelines when they evaluated simulated patients in common clinical scenarios. Methods: Anesthesiology resident volunteers at 24 training programs were presented with 6 scenarios characterized by surgical procedure, patient's risk factors, and patient's functional capacity. Scenarios and 5 possible recommendations per scenario were both presented in randomized orders. Senior anesthesiologists at 24 different United States training programs along with the first author of the 2007 ACC/AHA guidelines validated the appropriate recommendation to this web-based survey before distribution. Results: The 548 resident participants, representing 12{\%} of anesthesiology trainees in the United States, included 48 PGY-1s (preliminary year before anesthesia training), 166 Clinical Anesthesia Year 1 (CA-1) residents, 161 CA-2s, and 173 CA-3s. For patients with an active cardiac condition, the upper 95{\%} confidence bound for the percent of residents who recommended evaluations consistent with the guidelines was 78{\%}. However, for the remaining 5 scenarios, the upper 95{\%} confidence bound for the percent of residents with an appropriate recommendation was 46{\%}. Conclusions: The results show that fewer than half of anesthesiology residents nationwide correctly demonstrate the approach considered the standard of care for preoperative cardiac evaluation. Further study is necessary to elucidate the correct intervention(s), such as use of decision support tools, increased clarity of guidelines for routine use, adjustment in educational programs, and/or greater familiarity of responsible faculty with the material.",
author = "Vigoda, {Michael M.} and Bobbiejean Sweitzer and Nikola Miljkovic and Arheart, {Kristopher L.} and Shari Messinger and Keith Candiotti and David Lubarsky",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1213/ANE.0b013e31820a1457",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "112",
pages = "940--949",
journal = "Anesthesia and Analgesia",
issn = "0003-2999",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - 2007 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines on perioperative cardiac evaluation are usually incorrectly applied by anesthesiology residents evaluating simulated patients

AU - Vigoda, Michael M.

AU - Sweitzer, Bobbiejean

AU - Miljkovic, Nikola

AU - Arheart, Kristopher L.

AU - Messinger, Shari

AU - Candiotti, Keith

AU - Lubarsky, David

PY - 2011/1/1

Y1 - 2011/1/1

N2 - Background: The 2007 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guidelines on Perioperative Cardiac Evaluation and Care for Noncardiac Surgery is the accepted standard for perioperative cardiac evaluation. Anesthesiology training programs are required to teach these algorithms. We estimated the percentage of residents nationwide who correctly applied suggested testing algorithms from the ACC/AHA guidelines when they evaluated simulated patients in common clinical scenarios. Methods: Anesthesiology resident volunteers at 24 training programs were presented with 6 scenarios characterized by surgical procedure, patient's risk factors, and patient's functional capacity. Scenarios and 5 possible recommendations per scenario were both presented in randomized orders. Senior anesthesiologists at 24 different United States training programs along with the first author of the 2007 ACC/AHA guidelines validated the appropriate recommendation to this web-based survey before distribution. Results: The 548 resident participants, representing 12% of anesthesiology trainees in the United States, included 48 PGY-1s (preliminary year before anesthesia training), 166 Clinical Anesthesia Year 1 (CA-1) residents, 161 CA-2s, and 173 CA-3s. For patients with an active cardiac condition, the upper 95% confidence bound for the percent of residents who recommended evaluations consistent with the guidelines was 78%. However, for the remaining 5 scenarios, the upper 95% confidence bound for the percent of residents with an appropriate recommendation was 46%. Conclusions: The results show that fewer than half of anesthesiology residents nationwide correctly demonstrate the approach considered the standard of care for preoperative cardiac evaluation. Further study is necessary to elucidate the correct intervention(s), such as use of decision support tools, increased clarity of guidelines for routine use, adjustment in educational programs, and/or greater familiarity of responsible faculty with the material.

AB - Background: The 2007 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guidelines on Perioperative Cardiac Evaluation and Care for Noncardiac Surgery is the accepted standard for perioperative cardiac evaluation. Anesthesiology training programs are required to teach these algorithms. We estimated the percentage of residents nationwide who correctly applied suggested testing algorithms from the ACC/AHA guidelines when they evaluated simulated patients in common clinical scenarios. Methods: Anesthesiology resident volunteers at 24 training programs were presented with 6 scenarios characterized by surgical procedure, patient's risk factors, and patient's functional capacity. Scenarios and 5 possible recommendations per scenario were both presented in randomized orders. Senior anesthesiologists at 24 different United States training programs along with the first author of the 2007 ACC/AHA guidelines validated the appropriate recommendation to this web-based survey before distribution. Results: The 548 resident participants, representing 12% of anesthesiology trainees in the United States, included 48 PGY-1s (preliminary year before anesthesia training), 166 Clinical Anesthesia Year 1 (CA-1) residents, 161 CA-2s, and 173 CA-3s. For patients with an active cardiac condition, the upper 95% confidence bound for the percent of residents who recommended evaluations consistent with the guidelines was 78%. However, for the remaining 5 scenarios, the upper 95% confidence bound for the percent of residents with an appropriate recommendation was 46%. Conclusions: The results show that fewer than half of anesthesiology residents nationwide correctly demonstrate the approach considered the standard of care for preoperative cardiac evaluation. Further study is necessary to elucidate the correct intervention(s), such as use of decision support tools, increased clarity of guidelines for routine use, adjustment in educational programs, and/or greater familiarity of responsible faculty with the material.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79953191762&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79953191762&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31820a1457

DO - 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31820a1457

M3 - Article

VL - 112

SP - 940

EP - 949

JO - Anesthesia and Analgesia

JF - Anesthesia and Analgesia

SN - 0003-2999

IS - 4

ER -