Estimation of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress scoring system for predicting complications following abdominal surgery: A metaanalysis spanning 2004 to 2022

BACKGROUND Postoperative complications remain a paramount concern for surgeons and healthcare practitioners.AIM To present a comprehensive analysis of the Estimation of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress(E-PASS)scoring system’s efficacy in predicting postoperative complications following abdominal surgery.METHODS A systematic search of published studies was conducted,yielding 17 studies with pertinent data.Parameters such as preoperative risk score(PRS),surgical stress score(SSS),comprehensive risk score(CRS),postoperative complications,post-operative mortality,and other clinical data were collected for meta-analysis.Forest plots were employed for continuous and binary variables,withχ2 tests assessing heterogeneity(P value).RESULTS Patients experiencing complications after abdominal surgery exhibited significantly higher E-PASS scores compared to those without complications[mean difference and 95%confidence interval(CI)of PRS:0.10(0.05-0.15);SSS:0.04(0.001-0.08);CRS:0.19(0.07-0.31)].Following the exclusion of low-quality studies,results remained valid with no discernible heterogeneity.Subgroup analysis indicated that variations in sample size and age may contribute to hetero-geneity in CRS analysis.Binary variable meta-analysis demonstrated a correlation between high CRS and increased postoperative complication rates[odds ratio(OR)(95%CI):3.01(1.83-4.95)],with a significant association observed between high CRS and postoperative mortality[OR(95%CI):15.49(3.75-64.01)].CONCLUSION In summary,postoperative complications in abdominal surgery,as assessed by the E-PASS scoring system,are consistently linked to elevated PRS,SSS,and CRS scores.High CRS scores emerge as risk factors for heightened morbidity and mortality.This study establishes the accuracy of the E-PASS scoring system in predicting postoperative morbidity and mortality in abdominal surgery,underscoring its potential for widespread adoption in effective risk assessment.

Work Ability Index and Work Ability Score: A Comparation between both Scores in a Persistent COVID-19 Cohort

Aims: The present study aims to compare the assessment of work ability based on the use of the Work Ability Index (WAI) with another questionnaire base only on the use of WAI’s first item, termed as the “Work Ability Score” (WAS). Study design: A cohort of 384 Spanish workers included in a Post COVID-19 condition or persistent COVID-19 multicenter research was utilized. Place and Duration of Study: This cohort was enlisted in four hospitals (Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid;Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Sevilla, Andalucía;Hospital Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid and Complejo Asistencial Universitario de Salamanca, Castilla y León), since 2021 until 2022. Methodology: 384 Spanish workers (176 men and 208 women;aged 20 to 70 years) with Post COVID-19 condition or persistent COVID-19 were included. Descriptive analysis of primary scores was conducted. Given the non-normal distribution of data, the Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were employed. Spearman and Kendall correlations were employed to assess the relationship between WAI and WAS, also used weighted Kappa to estimate the degree agreement between WAI and WAS. Logistic regression models were utilized to study determinants influencing WAI and WAS, categorized as poor or moderate. Results: WAI had an average score of 32.98 (SD = 10.28), whereas WAS had an average of 5.95 (SD = 2.77). Significant differences were observed in both WAI and WAS across the same variables. Strong and statistically significant correlations were evident between WAI and WAS (rs = 0.83, p < 0.001). All the variables used in the logistic regression model (gender, the sector employment, and previous chronic diseases) were statistically significant in both questionnaires. Conclusion: WAS questionnaire could be used as a tool for reliable assessment of work ability among Spanish workers with Post COVID-19 condition or Persistent CO-VID-19.