History of ASA score
In 1940-41, ASA asked a committee of three physicians (Meyer Saklad, M.D., Emery Rovenstine, M.D., and Ivan Taylor, M.D.) to study, examine, experiment and devise a system for the collection and tabulation of statistical data in anesthesia which could be applicable under any circumstances.[1] This effort was the first by any medical specialty to stratify risk for its patients.[12] While their mission was to determine predictors for operative risk, they quickly dismissed this task as being impossible to devise. They state:
“In attempting to standardize and define what has heretofore been considered ‘Operative Risk’, it was found that the term … could not be used. It was felt that for the purposes of the anesthesia record and for any future evaluation of anesthetic agents or surgical procedures, it would be best to classify and grade the patient in relation to his physical status only.”[11]
The scale they proposed addressed the patient’s preoperative state only, not the surgical procedure or other factors that could influence surgical outcome. They hoped anesthesiologists from all parts of the country would adopt their “common terminology,” making statistical comparisons of morbidity and mortality possible by comparing outcomes to “the operative procedure and the patient’s preoperative condition”.[1][13]
They described a six-point scale, ranging from a healthy patient (class 1) to one with an extreme systemic disorder that is an imminent threat to life (class4). The first four points of their scale roughly correspond to today’s ASA classes 1-4, which were first published in 1963.[5] The original authors included two classes that encompassed emergencies which otherwise would have been coded in either the first two classes (class 5) or the second two (class 6). By the time of the 1963 publication of the present classification, two modifications were made. First, previous classes 5 and 6 were removed and a new class 5 was added for moribund patients not expected to survive 24 hours, with or without surgery. Second, separate classes for emergencies were eliminated in lieu of the “E” modifier of the other classes.[14][13] The sixth class is now used for declared brain-dead organ donors. Saklad gave examples of each class of patient in an attempt to encourage uniformity. Unfortunately, the ASA did not later describe each category with examples of patients and thus actually increased confusion.
Tags: Anesthesia
This entry was posted
on Friday, January 30th, 2009 at 4:37 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
While anesthesia providers use this scale to indicate the patient's overall physical health or "sickness" preoperatively, it is regarded by hospitals, law firms, accrediting boards and other health care groups as a scale to predict risk,[10] and thus decide if a patient should have – or should have had – an operation.[11] To predict operative risk, age and obesity of the patient, the nature and severity of the operative procedure, selection of anesthetic techniques, the competency of the surgical team (surgeon, anesthesia providers and assisting staff), duration of surgery or anesthesia, availability of equipment, medicine, blood, implants and especially the
ASA stands for American Society of Anesthesiologists. In 1963 the ASA adopted a five category physical status classification system for assessing a patient before surgery. A sixth category was later added. These are:
A normal healthy patient.
A patient with mild systemic disease.
A patient with severe systemic disease.
A patient with severe systemic disease that is a constant threat to life.
A moribund patient who is not expected to survive with or without the operation.
A declared brain-dead patient whose organs are being removed for donor purposes.
If the surgery is an emergency, the physical status score is followed by “E” (for emergency) for example “3E”.
These definitions appear in each annual edition of the ASA Relative Value Guide. There is no additional information that can be helpful to further define these categories.[3] It is logical to expect a missing category between ASA 2 and ASA 3 for a systemic disease which is neither mild nor severe, but is of moderate nature. It is also not clear what will be the ASA score of a patient who is suffering simultaneously from two, three or more systemic diseases (which might be of different severity).
Different authors give different versions of this ASA definition.[4] It is because this classification
LASIK or Lasik (laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis) is a type of refractive laser eye surgery performed by ophthalmologists for correcting myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism.[1] The procedure is generally preferred to photorefractive keratectomy, PRK, (also called ASA, Advanced Surface Ablation) because it requires less time for the patient's recovery, and the patient feels less pain overall. However, there are instances where a PRK/ASA procedure is medically justified as being a better alternative to LASIK.[citation needed]
Many patients choose LASIK as an alternative to wearing corrective eyeglasses or contact lenses.
Tiletamine is a dissociative anesthetic and pharmacologically classified as an NMDA receptor antagonist. It is related chemically and pharmacologically to other anesthetics in this family such as ketamine and phencyclidine. Tiletamine hydrochloride exists as odourless white crystals.
It is used in veterinary medicine in the compound product Telazol (tiletamine/zolazepam, 50mg/ml of each in 5ml vial) as an injectable anesthetic. It is sometimes used in combination with xylazine (Rompun) to tranquilize large mammals such as bears and horses. Telazol is the only commercially available tiletamine product in the USA.
It is contraindicated in patients of an ASA score of III or greater and
Quick serum biomarker for fibrosis assessment. This simple index is made up of available; routine laboratory tests. The test has not been validated by Health Authorities. Inacuracy: 50% of the results are unclassifiable. Most authors conslude that APRI test appears most useful for excluding significant fibrosis in hepatitis C.
Hepascore (Australia)
A blood test combining the following clinical and laboratory variables: age, gender, bilirubin, GGT, hyaluronic acid, a2macroglobin to create a score.The test has very few validations.
Prior to 2005, donor lungs within the United States were allocated by the United Network for Organ Sharing on a first-come, first-serve basis to patients on the transplant list. This was replaced by the current system, in which prospective lung recipients of age of 12 and older are assigned a lung allocation score or LAS, which takes into account various measures of the patient's health. The new system allocates donated lungs according to the immediacy of need rather than how long a patient has been on the transplant list. Patients who are under the age of 12 are still given
The film's score was composed by Don Davis. He noted that mirrors appear frequently in the movie: reflections of the blue and red pills are seen in Morpheus's glasses; Neo's capture by Agents is viewed through the rear-view mirror of Trinity's motorcycle; Neo observes a broken mirror mending itself; reflections warp as a spoon is bent; the reflection of a helicopter is visible as it approaches a skyscraper. (The film also frequently references the book Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, which has a sequel entitled Through the Looking-Glass.) Davis focused on this theme of reflections when creating his score, alternating between
intubation.[1] It is determined by looking at the anatomy of the oral cavity; specifically, it is based on the visibility of the base of uvula, faucial pillars (the arches in front of and behind the tonsils) and soft palate. Scoring may be done with or without phonation. Higher Mallampati Score (Class 4) is associated with more difficult intubation as well as a higher incidence of sleep apnea.[2]
Scoring is as follows:
Class 1: Full visibility of tonsils, uvula and soft palate
Class 2: Visibility of hard and soft palate, upper portion of tonsils and uvula
Class 3: Soft and hard palate and base of
A 1994 consensus conference led to the formulation of a set of diagnostic criteria. The higher the score (above 6), the more likely a reaction constituted MH:[6]
Respiratory acidosis (end-tidal CO2 above 55 mmHg or arterial pCO2 above 60 mgHg)
Heart involvement (unexplained sinus tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation)
Metabolic acidosis (base excess lower than -8, pH<7.25)
Muscle rigidity (generalized rigidity including severe masseter muscle rigidity)
Muscle breakdown (CK >20,000/L units, cola colored urine or excess myoglobin in urine or serum, potassium above 6 mmol/l)
Temperature increase (rapidly increasing temperature, T >38.8°C)
Other (rapid reversal of MH signs with dantrolene, elevated resting serum CK levels)
Family history
Leave a Reply