Validation of the Apfel Scoring System for Identification of High‑risk Patients for PONV

Authors

  •   Lulu Sherif Department of Anaesthesiology, Fr. Muller Medical College, Mangalore, Karnataka
  •   Radhesh Hegde Department of Anaesthesiology, Fr. Muller Medical College, Mangalore, Karnataka
  •   Mallikajaya Mariswami Department of Anaesthesiology, Fr. Muller Medical College, Mangalore, Karnataka
  •   Anjali Ollapally Department of Anaesthesiology, Fr. Muller Medical College, Mangalore, Karnataka

Keywords:

Apfel score, postoperative nausea and vomiting, simplified Apfel score

Abstract

Background and Aims: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) still present an important problem in anesthesia. In order to identify surgical patients who may benefit from prophylactic antiemetic medication, it is of interest to evaluate the risk factors for PONV using a simple scoring system. The simplified Apfel score includes four factors: female gender, nonsmoking status, postoperative use of opioids, and previous history of PONV or motion sickness. Each of these risk factors is supposed to elevate the incidence of PONV by about 20%. The aim of this study was to validate Apfel’s clinical risk assessment score for identification of patients with high risk for PONV in our hospital. Materials and Methods: In a prospective study, 150 patients posted for various elective surgeries under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation were analyzed and grouped into five groups, based on the Apfel risk scoring system. Each risk was given a score of 1, the total score being 4. PONV was monitored for 24 h and classified as grades 0, 1, and 2. Grades 1 and 2 were considered as PONV. The results obtained were analyzed for total incidence of PONV in each group of Apfel’s scores and they were compared with the predicted incidence of PONV as per the documented Apfel’s risk assessment. Collected data were analyzed by the Chi‑square test, and the scoring system was assessed for sensitivity and specificity. Results: Of the 150 patients assessed, a total of 42% had PONV. Patients grouped under Apfel Score I had PONV incidence of 25.5%, the group with Score II had an incidence of 37.8%, the group with Score III had 64.6%, and the group with Score IV had 83.3%. This incidence of PONV corresponded to the predicted approximate values of 20% for Apfel Score I, 40% for Apfel II, 60% for Apfel III, and 80% for Apfel IV. Conclusions: The Apfel scoring system is simple and useful for identifying patients with high risk for PONV.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2015-07-01

How to Cite

Sherif, L., Hegde, R., Mariswami, M., & Ollapally, A. (2015). Validation of the Apfel Scoring System for Identification of High‑risk Patients for PONV. Karnataka Anaesthesia Journal, 1(3), 115–117. Retrieved from https://karnatakaanesthesiajournal.in/index.php/kaj/article/view/139392

Issue

Section

Original Articles

References

Kovac AL. Prevention and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Drugs 2000;59:213‑43.

van den Bosch JE, Kalkman CJ, Vergouwe Y, Van Klei WA, Bonsel GJ, Grobbee DE, et al. Assessing the applicability of scoring systems for predicting postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anaesthesia 2005;60:323‑31.

Apfel CC, Läärä E, Koivuranta M, Greim CA, Roewer N. A simplified risk score for predicting postoperative nausea and vomiting: Conclusions from cross‑validations between two centers. Anesthesiology 1999;91:693‑700.

Koivuranta M, Läärä E, Snåre L, Alahuhta S. A survey of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anaesthesia 1997;52:443‑9.

Palazzo M, Evans R. Logistic regression analysis of fixed patient factors for postoperative sickness: A model for risk assessment. Br J Anaesth 1993;70:135‑40.

Gan TJ. Postoperative nausea and vomiting ‑ can it be eliminated?JAMA 2002;287:1233‑6.

Weilbach C, Rahe‑meyer N, Raymondos K, Weissig A, Scheinichen D, Piepenbrock S. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV): Usefulness of the Apfel‑score for identification of high risk patients for PONV. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg 2006;57:361‑3.

Laupacis A, Sekar N, Stiell IG. Clinical prediction rules. A review and suggested modifications of methodological standards. JAMA 1997;277:488‑94.

McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC, Naylor CD, Stiell IG, Richardson WS.Users’ guides to the medical literature: XXII: How to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence‑Based Medicine Working Group.JAMA 2000;284:79‑84.

Pierre S, Benais H, Pouymayou J. Apfel’s simplified score may favourably predict the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Can J Anaesth 2002;49:237‑42.

Scuderi PE, James RL, Harris L, Mims GR 3rd. Multimodal antiemetic management prevents early postoperative vomiting after outpatient laparoscopy. Anesth Analg 2000;91:1408‑14.

Habib AS, White WD, Eubanks S, Pappas TN, Gan TJ. A randomized comparison of multimodal management strategy versus combination antiemetics for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.Anesth Analg 2004;99:77‑81.

White PF. Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting‑‑ a multimodal solution to a persistent problem. N Engl J Med 2004;350:2511‑2.