ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2022
Evaluation of choosing wisely recommendations on preprocedural cardiovascular testing.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study objective: The Choosing Wisely (CW) initiative currently has multiple recommendations focused on avoiding preprocedural testing in asymptomatic patients prior to low-risk surgery. The purpose of this study was to measure the potential impact of the CW recommendations as they relate to preprocedural testing prior to cataract surgery. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Single academic medical center. Participants: Patients undergoing cataract surgery from 01/02/2018 to 12/31/2018. Interventions: N/A. Main outcome measures: Prevalence of preprocedural testing in elevated versus low cardiac risk patients as defined by the Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI). Results: Of a total 909 patients, 90 (9.9%) had some form of preprocedural testing ordered; testing was more common among elevated risk (n = 50/315, 15.9%) compared to low-risk patients (n = 40/594, 6.7%; p < 0.0001). Of the tests ordered, 9 were abnormal (4 in the low-risk cohort, 5 in the elevated risk cohort). ECGs were the vast majority of tests ordered (n = 88/90). No stress test orders or periprocedural adverse cardiovascular (CV) events were observed. Anesthesiology clinicians ordered 95.6% of preprocedural testing. "Routine" was the justification given for the substantial majority of tests ordered in both cohorts (90% low-risk, 86% elevated risk). Conclusion: Our investigation confirms that cataract surgery has exceptionally low rates of postprocedural CV events. In contemporary practice, preprocedural CV testing for cataract surgery is not highly prevalent, rarely abnormal, and also not well justified by ordering clinicians. Our results may be considered as justification for revisions of some CW recommendations to potentially target higher prevalence areas of low-value care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.