Suppr超能文献

增强康复路径能否改善阴式子宫切除术的结局?队列对照研究。

Can enhanced recovery pathways improve outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy? Cohort control study.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, North Middlesex University Hospital, London, United Kingdom.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, North Middlesex University Hospital, London, United Kingdom.

出版信息

J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014 Jan-Feb;21(1):83-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.06.007. Epub 2013 Jul 10.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of enhanced recovery pathway implementation on patient outcomes after vaginal hysterectomy (VH) performed to treat benign indications.

DESIGN

Case-control study examining outcome measures including length of stay, pain scores, postoperative morbidity, and readmission rates after implementation of the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) program for VH (Canadian Task Force classification II).

SETTING

Teaching hospital.

PATIENTS

Fifty patients who underwent VH after implementation of ERAS were compared with 50 control patients before ERAS. Patients were matched for age, indication for surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, and surgeon.

INTERVENTION

ERAS pathway.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Length of stay, percentage of patients discharged within 24 hours, use of urinary catheter and vaginal packing, and readmission rates were determined. Perioperative expenditures were compared, and cost-effectiveness of ERAS was assessed. Median patient vs control age (49.0 vs 51.0 years), parity (2.0 vs 2.0), and body mass index (26.5 vs 28.3) were statistically comparable. After ERAS implementation, the median length of stay was reduced by 51.6% (22.0 vs 45.5 hours; p < .01), and the percentage of patients discharged within 24 hours was increased by 5-fold (78.0 vs 15.6%; p < .05). Frequency of catheter use (82.0% vs 95.6%) and use of vaginal packing (52.0 vs 82.2%) were significantly lower in the post-ERAS group, and these devices were removed earlier (14.5 vs 23.7 hours and 16.0 vs 23.0 hours, respectively; p < .05 in all cases). Attendance in the Accident and Emergency Department (12.0% vs 0%; p > .05) and inpatient readmission rate (4.0% vs 0%; p > .05) were similar in both groups. Despite having to start a "gynecology school" and employ a specialist Enhanced Recovery nurse, a cost savings of 9.25% per patient was demonstrated.

CONCLUSION

The ERAS program in benign VH reduces length of stay by 51.6% and enables more women to be discharged within 24 hours, with no increase in patient readmissions rates.

摘要

研究目的

评估实施增强康复路径对因良性指征而行阴道子宫切除术(VH)后患者结局的影响。

设计

病例对照研究,考察包括住院时间、疼痛评分、术后发病率和再入院率在内的结局指标,在实施增强术后康复(ERAS)方案后(加拿大任务组分类 II)对 VH 进行评估。

设置

教学医院。

患者

50 例在实施 ERAS 后接受 VH 的患者与 50 例 ERAS 前的对照患者进行比较。对患者进行年龄、手术指征、美国麻醉医师协会分级和外科医生匹配。

干预措施

ERAS 路径。

测量和主要结果

确定住院时间、24 小时内出院患者的百分比、导尿管和阴道填塞的使用以及再入院率。比较围手术期支出,并评估 ERAS 的成本效益。患者与对照的中位年龄(49.0 岁 vs. 51.0 岁)、产次(2.0 次 vs. 2.0 次)和体重指数(26.5 公斤/平方米 vs. 28.3 公斤/平方米)统计学上相似。在实施 ERAS 后,住院时间中位数缩短 51.6%(22.0 小时 vs. 45.5 小时;p<.01),24 小时内出院的患者比例增加 5 倍(78.0% vs. 15.6%;p<.05)。导尿管使用率(82.0% vs. 95.6%)和阴道填塞使用率(52.0% vs. 82.2%)在 ERAS 后组显著降低,并且这些装置的去除时间更早(14.5 小时 vs. 23.7 小时和 16.0 小时 vs. 23.0 小时;p<.05 )。急症就诊率(12.0% vs. 0%;p>.05)和住院再入院率(4.0% vs. 0%;p>.05)在两组中相似。尽管必须开设“妇科学校”并雇佣一名增强康复专科护士,但每个患者可节省 9.25%的成本。

结论

良性 VH 的 ERAS 方案可将住院时间缩短 51.6%,使更多女性在 24 小时内出院,而患者再入院率无增加。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验