Skip Navigation


BJA Advance Access originally published online on January 31, 2008
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2008 100(3):315-321; doi:10.1093/bja/aem399
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
100/3/315    most recent
aem399v1
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow E-letters: View responses
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Murthy, B. V. S.
Right arrow Articles by Fisher, A. C.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Murthy, B. V. S.
Right arrow Articles by Fisher, A. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2008. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Evaluation of a decision support system to predict preoperative investigations

B. V. S. Murthy1,*, S. P. Lake2 and A. C. Fisher2

1 Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Prescot Street, Liverpool L7 8XP, UK
2 Department of Clinical Engineering, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Prescot Street, Liverpool L7 8XP, UK

* Corresponding author. E-mail: burra.murthy{at}rlbuht.nhs.uk

Background: We have developed the ‘Optimising Surgical Care and Assessment Record’ (OSCAR), a clinical decision support system, to help nurses in predicting necessary preoperative investigations before surgery. OSCAR applies the hospital’s protocols, which are based on the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines, to the patient’s medical history and surgical details before recommending required investigations.

Methods: We selected case notes of 50 patients randomly from the OSCAR system that were recorded between October 2006 and January 2007. To form a reference standard, these case histories were anonymized and then sent to 10 consultant anaesthetists across the country. They were asked to study the case history and choose which tests they would carry out and which they would not. Then we have evaluated OSCAR’s ability to predict the necessary investigations and the nurses’ judgement, in comparison with the reference standard.

Results: OSCAR’s ability to identify which investigations should be carried out, that is, its sensitivity, was 91.5% and its ability to identify which investigations not to carry out, that is, its specificity, was 82.7%. OSCAR was consistent in predicting investigations for differing severities of surgery, for ASA grade and gender. We were unable to demonstrate any overall difference between OSCAR and the nurse’s ability to predict preoperative investigations. When combining the nurse’s predictions with OSCAR’s recommendations, an even greater sensitivity of 98.2% could be achieved.

Conclusions: OSCAR’s prediction algorithm cannot replace the nurse’s judgement, but it can be used as a supplementary decision aid to promote consistency and improve accuracy.

Keywords: assessment, preanaesthetic; computers; statistics, sensitivity; statistics, specificity


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


E-letters:

Read all E-letters

Wrong standards
Jon M Maskill
British Journal of Anaesthesia, 13 Apr 2008 [Full text]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.