Day surgery for gynaecological laparoscopy: Clinical results from an RCT

Q4 Nursing Ambulatory Surgery Pub Date : 2006-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ambsur.2005.10.001
Claire Gudex , Jan Sørensen , Ingo Clausen
{"title":"Day surgery for gynaecological laparoscopy: Clinical results from an RCT","authors":"Claire Gudex ,&nbsp;Jan Sørensen ,&nbsp;Ingo Clausen","doi":"10.1016/j.ambsur.2005.10.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This randomized controlled trial compared the clinical outcome from inpatient and ambulatory laparoscopy for benign gynaecological conditions. While 658 consecutive patients were considered for inclusion into the study, data from 26 inpatients and 40 ambulatory cases were analysed. Inpatient surgery was undertaken by more senior surgeons (<em>p</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->0.001), but complication rates were similar. For remedial surgery (but not diagnostic), ambulatory laparoscopy had shorter anaesthetic and operating times (<em>p</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->0.05) than inpatient surgery. Both inpatient and ambulatory patients reported significant improvements (<em>p</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <span><span><span>0.01) in immediate postoperative pain; similar proportions (64% and 74%, respectively) experienced postoperative nausea; 39% of inpatients and 58% of ambulatory patients reported problems after hospital discharge. Severity of </span>pelvic pain was lower for both groups 1 month after operation in comparison to preoperative levels (inpatients: from 8.0 to 5.0, ambulatory: 6.0 to 3.0; on a 0–10 VAS). It was concluded that clinical and patient outcome was similar for the patients undergoing inpatient and </span>ambulatory surgery for gynaecological laparoscopy.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":38794,"journal":{"name":"Ambulatory Surgery","volume":"12 4","pages":"Pages 151-157"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ambsur.2005.10.001","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ambulatory Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966653205000685","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

This randomized controlled trial compared the clinical outcome from inpatient and ambulatory laparoscopy for benign gynaecological conditions. While 658 consecutive patients were considered for inclusion into the study, data from 26 inpatients and 40 ambulatory cases were analysed. Inpatient surgery was undertaken by more senior surgeons (p < 0.001), but complication rates were similar. For remedial surgery (but not diagnostic), ambulatory laparoscopy had shorter anaesthetic and operating times (p < 0.05) than inpatient surgery. Both inpatient and ambulatory patients reported significant improvements (p < 0.01) in immediate postoperative pain; similar proportions (64% and 74%, respectively) experienced postoperative nausea; 39% of inpatients and 58% of ambulatory patients reported problems after hospital discharge. Severity of pelvic pain was lower for both groups 1 month after operation in comparison to preoperative levels (inpatients: from 8.0 to 5.0, ambulatory: 6.0 to 3.0; on a 0–10 VAS). It was concluded that clinical and patient outcome was similar for the patients undergoing inpatient and ambulatory surgery for gynaecological laparoscopy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
妇科腹腔镜日间手术:一项随机对照试验的临床结果
本随机对照试验比较了住院和门诊腹腔镜治疗良性妇科疾病的临床结果。658名连续患者被纳入研究,分析了26名住院患者和40名门诊患者的数据。住院手术由更资深的外科医生进行(p <0.001),但并发症发生率相似。对于补救手术(但不是诊断),门诊腹腔镜麻醉和手术时间更短(p <0.05)高于住院手术。住院和门诊患者均报告有显著改善(p <术后即刻疼痛0.01);相似比例(分别为64%和74%)出现术后恶心;39%的住院患者和58%的门诊患者报告出院后出现问题。两组患者术后1个月盆腔疼痛严重程度均低于术前水平(住院患者:8.0 - 5.0,门诊患者:6.0 - 3.0;0-10 VAS评分)。结论:妇科腹腔镜住院和门诊手术患者的临床和患者预后相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ambulatory Surgery
Ambulatory Surgery Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Bacterial gene expression analysis using microarrays. Author index Subject Index Editorial Board Ambulatory Surgery Calender
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1