Rudkin G E, Bacon A K, Burrow B, Chapman M H, Claxton M, Donovan B, Gibb D, Weber L S
Day Surgery Unit, Royal Adelaide Hospital, S.A.
Anaesth Intensive Care. 1996 Feb;24(1):74-8. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9602400113.
A pilot study was performed in eight Australasian day surgery facilities with a purpose of identifying common trends and differences. A prospective study was designed in which information was collected on 826 patients over a two-week period. Patients were well matched for age, anaesthetic type and mean surgical time. Three facility types were identified and results were statistically corrected for any differences that ASA status, age and surgical time may have made. Patient preoperative waiting time, recovery room times, delayed discharge time and unanticipated admission rates showed favourable outcome trends for free-standing facilities compared with hospital-integrated facilities where day patients had a shared recovery with inpatients. Similar trends were seen with patient opinions of waiting times and recovery periods. In summary, this pilot study has demonstrated the impact of different facility types on efficiencies and patient satisfaction both of which have important cost implications and relevance to those involved in continuous quality improvement processes in day surgery.
在八个澳大拉西亚日间手术机构进行了一项试点研究，目的是确定共同趋势和差异。设计了一项前瞻性研究，在两周时间内收集了826名患者的信息。患者在年龄、麻醉类型和平均手术时间方面匹配良好。确定了三种机构类型，并对美国麻醉医师协会（ASA）分级状态、年龄和手术时间可能造成的任何差异进行了统计学校正。与日间患者与住院患者共用恢复室的医院综合机构相比，独立机构的患者术前等待时间、恢复室时间、延迟出院时间和意外入院率显示出有利的结果趋势。在等待时间和恢复期的患者意见方面也观察到了类似趋势。总之，这项试点研究证明了不同机构类型对效率和患者满意度的影响，这两者都具有重要的成本影响，并且与日间手术持续质量改进过程中的相关人员密切相关。
