Abstract
There are two commonly used scoring systems to evaluate recovery from general anaesthesia (GA): the Modified Aldrete Score (MAS) and the Fast-Track Criteria (FTC). Recently, concerns have been expressed about the safety and effectiveness of the Aldrete scoring system due to its exclusion of an assessment for pain or nausea, which can exacerbate recovery from surgery and anaesthesia and cause many patients to experience these side effects. FTC was created to evaluate post-operative nausea vomiting, and pain in order to assess recovery from GA. More data are needed to compare these scoring criteria in low-income countries like India. Understanding how these scores can be effectively utilised in our settings is crucial for ensuring the timely transfer of patients from the operating theatre to the Post-anaesthesia Care Unit and, subsequently, to the ward. This review aims to evaluate the available literature on MAS and FTC and compare their effectiveness. It was found that FTC is more appropriate for outpatient or day surgery procedures where rapid throughput and patient comfort are a priority. MAS, in itself, is very good for a low-income country like India. However, the addition of FTC can only enhance patient care if resources are made available. MAS can ensure consistency and efficiency in the discharge process, while using FTC can address broader recovery-related indicators and improve patient care. More research and modifications are further necessary.