Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Health Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; Division of Nursing, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden.
Br J Anaesth. 2022 Jul;129(1):92-103. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2022.04.015. Epub 2022 May 24.
There is no consensus about the type of instrument with which to assess postoperative recovery or the time points when assessments are most appropriate. It is also unclear whether instruments measure the four dimensions of postoperative recovery, that is physical, psychological, social, and habitual recovery. This scoping review had three objectives: (1) to identify and describe instruments used in clinical trials to assess postoperative recovery; (2) to determine how, when, and the number of times postoperative recovery was measured; and (3) to explore whether the four dimensions of postoperative recovery are represented in the identified instruments.
A literature search was conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. The search terms were related to three search strands: postoperative recovery, instrument, and clinical trials. The limits were English language and publication January 2010 to November 2021. In total, 5015 studies were identified.
A total of 198 studies were included in the results. We identified 20 instruments measuring postoperative recovery. Different versions of Quality of Recovery represented 81.8% of the included instruments. Postoperative recovery was often assessed at one time point (47.2%) and most often on postoperative day 1 (81.5%). Thirteen instruments had items covering all four dimensions of postoperative recovery.
Assessing recovery is important to evaluate and improve perioperative care. We emphasise the importance of choosing the right instrument for the concept studied and, if postoperative recovery is of interest, of assessing more than once. Ideally, instruments should include all four dimensions to cover the whole recovery process.
目前，对于评估术后恢复的工具类型以及最适合进行评估的时间点尚未达成共识。此外，也不清楚这些工具是否能够测量术后恢复的四个维度，即身体、心理、社会和习惯恢复。本范围综述有三个目标：（1）确定并描述临床试验中用于评估术后恢复的工具；（2）确定术后恢复是如何、何时以及测量了多少次；（3）探讨所确定的工具中是否体现了术后恢复的四个维度。
在 CINAHL、MEDLINE 和 Web of Science 中进行了文献检索。检索词与三个检索词相关：术后恢复、工具和临床试验。语言限制为英语，检索时间为 2010 年 1 月至 2021 年 11 月。共确定了 5015 项研究。
共纳入了 198 项研究。我们确定了 20 种用于测量术后恢复的工具。代表 81.8%的工具是不同版本的恢复质量。术后恢复通常在一个时间点进行评估（47.2%），最常评估的是术后第 1 天（81.5%）。有 13 种工具的项目涵盖了术后恢复的所有四个维度。
评估恢复对于评估和改善围手术期护理非常重要。我们强调了选择适合研究概念的正确工具的重要性，如果对术后恢复感兴趣，则应进行多次评估。理想情况下，工具应包括所有四个维度，以涵盖整个恢复过程。
