Murphy Patrick B, DeGirolamo Kristin, Van Zyl Theunis Jean, Allen Laura, Haut Elliott, Leeper W Robert, Leslie Ken, Parry Neil, Hameed Morad, Vogt Kelly N
Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada.
Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
J Am Coll Surg. 2017 Dec;225(6):763-777.e13. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.08.026. Epub 2017 Sep 14.
The acute care surgery (ACS) model was developed to acknowledge the complexity of a traditionally fractured emergency general surgery patient population, however, there are variations in the design of ACS service models. This meta-analysis analyzes the impact of implementation of different ACS models on the outcomes for appendicitis and biliary disease.
A systematic, English-language search of major databases was conducted. From 1,827 papers, 2 independent reviewers identified 25 studies that reported on outcomes for patients with appendicitis (n = 13), biliary disease (n = 7), or both (n = 5), before and after implementation of an ACS service. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to score quality. Outcomes were analyzed using random effect methodology and sensitivity analyses were performed.
Significant heterogeneity existed between studies and ACS designs. The overall study quality rating was fair to poor with a moderate risk of bias. After implementation of an ACS service, there was an overall reduction in length of stay by 0.51 days (95% CI -0.81 to -0.20 days) and 0.73 days (95% CI 0.09 to 1.36 days) for appendicitis and biliary disease, respectively. Complication rates were lower after implementing ACS (odds ratio 0.65; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.86 and odds ratio 0.46; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.61). There was no difference in after-hours operating for either appendicitis or biliary disease, except when considering ACS models with dedicated theater time, which favors an ACS model (odds ratio 0.49; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.73) in appendicitis.
The ACS model has been shown to benefit acute care surgery patients with improved access to care, fewer complications, and decreased length of stay for 2 common disease processes. The design and implementation of an ACS service can impact the magnitude of effect.
急性护理手术(ACS)模式的建立是为了认识到传统上骨折的急诊普通外科患者群体的复杂性,然而,ACS服务模式的设计存在差异。这项荟萃分析分析了不同ACS模式的实施对阑尾炎和胆道疾病治疗结果的影响。
对主要数据库进行了系统的英文检索。从1827篇论文中,2名独立评审员确定了25项研究,这些研究报告了ACS服务实施前后阑尾炎患者(n = 13)、胆道疾病患者(n = 7)或两者兼有的患者(n = 5)的治疗结果。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表对质量进行评分。采用随机效应方法分析结果,并进行敏感性分析。
研究和ACS设计之间存在显著异质性。总体研究质量评级为中等至较差,存在中度偏倚风险。实施ACS服务后,阑尾炎和胆道疾病的住院时间分别总体减少了0.51天(95%CI -0.81至-0.20天)和0.73天(95%CI 0.09至1.36天)。实施ACS后并发症发生率较低(比值比0.65;95%CI 0.49至0.86和比值比0.46;95%CI 0.34至0.61)。阑尾炎或胆道疾病的非工作时间手术没有差异,除非考虑具有专用手术时间的ACS模式,这有利于阑尾炎的ACS模式(比值比0.49;95%CI 0.33至0.73)。
ACS模式已被证明有利于急性护理手术患者,可改善获得护理的机会,减少并发症,并缩短两种常见疾病过程中的住院时间。ACS服务的设计和实施会影响效果的大小。