Evidence Hub

Preoperative Cognitive Stratification of Older Elective Surgical Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study

D. Culley, D. Flaherty, Srini Reddy, Margaret C. Fahey, J. Rudolph, Chuan-Chin Huang, Xiaoxia Liu, Zhong-Cong Xie et al.

Anesthesia and Analgesia, 2016

311 participants · 101 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND:Preexisting cognitive impairment is emerging as a predictor of poor postoperative outcomes in seniors. We hypothesized that preoperative cognitive screening can be performed in a busy preadmission evaluation center and that cognitive impairment is prevalent in elective geriatric surgical patients. METHODS:We approached 311 patients aged 65 years and older presenting for preoperative evaluation before elective surgery in a prospective, observational, single-center study. Forty-eight patients were ineligible, and 63 declined. The remaining 200 were randomly assigned to the Mini-Cog (N =100) or Clock-in-the-Box [CIB; N = 100)] test. Study staff administered the test in a quiet room, and 2 investigators scored the tests independently. Probable cognitive impairment was defined as a Mini-Cog ⩽ 2 or a CIB ⩽ 5. RESULTS:The age of consenting patients was 73.7 ± 6.4 (mean ± SD) years. There were no significant differences between patients randomly assigned to the Mini-Cog and CIB test in age, weight, gender, education, ASA physical status, or Charlston Index. Overall, 23% of patients met criteria for probable cognitive impairment, and prevalence was virtually identical regardless of the test used; 22% screened with the Mini-Cog and 23% screened with the CIB scored as having probable cognitive impairment (P = 1.0 by &khgr;2 analysis). Both tests had good interrater reliability (Krippendroff &agr; = 0.86 [0.72–0.93] for Mini-Cog and 11 for CIB). CONCLUSIONS:Preoperative…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 311 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free