Suppr超能文献

一项前瞻性观察性研究,比较基于标准的出院方法与传统的基于时间的出院方法,用于从麻醉后护理单元出院的接受全身麻醉的门诊或门诊小手术患者。

A prospective observational study comparing criteria-based discharge method with traditional time-based discharge method for discharging patients from post-anaesthesia care unit undergoing ambulatory or outpatient minor surgeries under general anaesthesia.

作者信息

Jain Anuj, Muralidhar Varadarajan, Aneja Sanjeev, Sharma Anil Kumar

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals, New Delhi, India.

出版信息

Indian J Anaesth. 2018 Jan;62(1):61-65. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_549_17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Mostly, institutions in India have single post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) which follows traditional time-based discharge (TBD) method. Recently, it has been classified into PACU Phase I and Phase II, and criteria-based discharge (CBD) method has been used. This study primarily compares CBD versus TBD methods in moving patients through PACU, and other non-clinical factors causing delay in shifting.

METHODS

One hundred patients, aged 18-65 years, American Society of Anesthesiologist's physical status I and II, scheduled for elective minor surgeries under general anaesthesia were studied. White's fast-track score in operating room (OR) and modified Aldrete's score (CBD time) in PACU were recorded. Patients were scheduled to discharge at 60 min based on TBD method. The mean CBD time and actual discharge time from PACU were statistically compared with TBD time. Other non-clinical factors delaying the discharge were also studied.

RESULTS

Eighty-five percent of patients achieved acceptable White's fast-track score in OR. The TBD time (60 min) was compared with the mean CBD time (10.70 ± 2.56 min) and actual discharge time (79.75 ± 12.98 min), which were found to be statistically significant. Primarily, anaesthesiologists' busy schedule was accountable for delay in discharge.

CONCLUSION

The study concluded that in patients undergoing ambulatory minor surgeries, discharge times based on Criterion Based Discharge scoring systems such as modified Aldrete's and White's-fast are significantly lower in PACU Phase I as compared to the traditional Time Based Discharge method.

摘要

背景与目的

在印度,大多数机构只有一个麻醉后护理单元(PACU),采用传统的基于时间的出院(TBD)方法。最近,它已被分为PACU一期和二期,并采用了基于标准的出院(CBD)方法。本研究主要比较CBD与TBD方法在患者通过PACU过程中的差异,以及导致转移延迟的其他非临床因素。

方法

研究了100例年龄在18 - 65岁、美国麻醉医师协会身体状况为I级和II级、计划在全身麻醉下进行择期小手术的患者。记录手术室(OR)的怀特快速通道评分和PACU的改良Aldrete评分(CBD时间)。根据TBD方法,患者计划在60分钟时出院。将PACU的平均CBD时间和实际出院时间与TBD时间进行统计学比较。还研究了其他导致出院延迟的非临床因素。

结果

85%的患者在OR中达到了可接受的怀特快速通道评分。将TBD时间(60分钟)与平均CBD时间(10.70±2.56分钟)和实际出院时间(79.75±12.98分钟)进行比较,发现具有统计学意义。主要是麻醉医生繁忙的日程安排导致了出院延迟。

结论

该研究得出结论,在接受门诊小手术的患者中,与传统的基于时间的出院方法相比,在PACU一期中,基于改良Aldrete和怀特快速通道等基于标准的出院评分系统的出院时间显著更低。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ad0b/5787893/de4bcfcf9f96/IJA-62-61-g001.jpg

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