Fast-track Protocol versus Conventional Protocol on Patient Outcome: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to compare fast-track methodology with traditional methods of surgical care in achieving better patient outcome, and ensuring a timely discharge from the hospital, and also note the factors that are responsible for a delayed discharge from the hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred patients undergoing elective surgeries were randomly allocated into fast-track and traditional protocol of perioperative care. Patients who underwent fast-track protocol (FTP) were started on early oral feeding and were encouraged for early discharge, while the others were made to follow the traditional method of recovery. The gastrointestinal functions, postoperative complications and hospital stay time were recorded. The results were tabulated and analyzed.

RESULTS

Early feeding was well tolerated by all the patients in the "fast track" group, while the patients in the control group had increased number of "nil by mouth" days, and this result was statistically significant. Ambulation was started earlier in the case group as compared to the controls, and the mean period of starting of ambulation was statistically significant, in the cases as compared to the controls. The patients in the case group had an earlier discharge from the hospital, as compared to the control group. The most common reason for a delay in discharge from the hospital, in either group, was seen to be inadequate pain relief postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

The FTP can significantly shorten the postoperative hospital stay after elective surgery, as compared to the traditional protocol.