[The anesthesiological questionnaire for patients in the outpatient context : Investigations on patient state of health after outpatient operations using the anesthesiological questionnaire for patients].

4区 医学 Q3 Medicine Anaesthesist Pub Date : 2021-10-01 Epub Date: 2021-02-22 DOI:10.1007/s00101-021-00921-y
M Weber, M Hüppe, E Cavus, H Ocker, K Gerlach
{"title":"[The anesthesiological questionnaire for patients in the outpatient context : Investigations on patient state of health after outpatient operations using the anesthesiological questionnaire for patients].","authors":"M Weber,&nbsp;M Hüppe,&nbsp;E Cavus,&nbsp;H Ocker,&nbsp;K Gerlach","doi":"10.1007/s00101-021-00921-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The evaluation of German postanesthesia questionnaires is often restricted to inpatient medical care. The anesthesiological questionnaire for patients (ANP) has previously been validated only after medical care of inpatients. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the validity of the ANP in the context of outpatient surgery and anesthesia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from 4547 patients (mean age 18-89 years, sex: m/f, 55%/45%), scheduled for ambulatory orthopedic and trauma surgery, were analyzed. All patients received a standard induction of anesthesia with propofol, sufentanil and 4 mg dexamethasone. Maintenance of anesthesia was achieved with a balanced technique comprising volatile anesthesia (either sevoflurane or desflurane) and sufentanil. In addition, patients undergoing operations on the anterior cruciate ligament received a femoral nerve block with 12-15 ml 0.5% ropivacaine. Of the patients 13% remained in hospital overnight as a result of complex operations (combined anterior and posterior cruciate ligament repair, hip arthroscopy and 10% of those undergoing shoulder operations). Before discharge from the recovery room, patients were asked to answer questions with respect to postoperative symptoms 1h after anesthesia (ESNA 19 items), at the time of interview (ABZ 17 items) and about overall patient satisfaction (10 items). These results were matched with the type of procedure and time data from the patient administration system. All data were analyzed descriptively using parametrical tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At both time points, pain in the area of the operation was the predominant symptom (ESNA: 77,1%; ABZ: 74,3%). Pain after shoulder arthroscopy was more severe compared to knee arthroscopy, both with and without repair of the anterior cruciate ligament. Most of the adverse symptoms decreased significantly (p ≤ 0.001) with time, demonstrating progressive recovery of the patient. Patient discomfort was more likely to occur in female than in male patients, and female patients were more likely to be dissatisfied with the progress of recovery. The risk of experiencing adverse symptoms after anesthesia was higher for female than for male patients; this was most apparent for feeling cold (odds ratio, OR 4.08) and nausea and vomiting (OR 3.45). Younger patients (18-40 years) were more likely to express discomfort than both groups of older patients (41-60 years and 61-89 years). Accordingly, younger patients had lower satisfaction levels with respect to both anesthesia and overall perioperative care, and the progress of recovery. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were linked to younger age, female sex, and longer procedure times (>40 min).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The individual analyses delivered plausible results, which support the validity of the ANP. The ANP may also be used for assessment of postoperative discomfort and patient satisfaction in the setting of outpatient surgery. In view of the short time interval between the two measurement points, the ANP for outpatients could in future be reduced to a single postoperative questionnaire.</p>","PeriodicalId":50796,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesist","volume":"70 10","pages":"843-853"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00101-021-00921-y","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-021-00921-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/2/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: The evaluation of German postanesthesia questionnaires is often restricted to inpatient medical care. The anesthesiological questionnaire for patients (ANP) has previously been validated only after medical care of inpatients. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the validity of the ANP in the context of outpatient surgery and anesthesia.

Methods: Data from 4547 patients (mean age 18-89 years, sex: m/f, 55%/45%), scheduled for ambulatory orthopedic and trauma surgery, were analyzed. All patients received a standard induction of anesthesia with propofol, sufentanil and 4 mg dexamethasone. Maintenance of anesthesia was achieved with a balanced technique comprising volatile anesthesia (either sevoflurane or desflurane) and sufentanil. In addition, patients undergoing operations on the anterior cruciate ligament received a femoral nerve block with 12-15 ml 0.5% ropivacaine. Of the patients 13% remained in hospital overnight as a result of complex operations (combined anterior and posterior cruciate ligament repair, hip arthroscopy and 10% of those undergoing shoulder operations). Before discharge from the recovery room, patients were asked to answer questions with respect to postoperative symptoms 1h after anesthesia (ESNA 19 items), at the time of interview (ABZ 17 items) and about overall patient satisfaction (10 items). These results were matched with the type of procedure and time data from the patient administration system. All data were analyzed descriptively using parametrical tests.

Results: At both time points, pain in the area of the operation was the predominant symptom (ESNA: 77,1%; ABZ: 74,3%). Pain after shoulder arthroscopy was more severe compared to knee arthroscopy, both with and without repair of the anterior cruciate ligament. Most of the adverse symptoms decreased significantly (p ≤ 0.001) with time, demonstrating progressive recovery of the patient. Patient discomfort was more likely to occur in female than in male patients, and female patients were more likely to be dissatisfied with the progress of recovery. The risk of experiencing adverse symptoms after anesthesia was higher for female than for male patients; this was most apparent for feeling cold (odds ratio, OR 4.08) and nausea and vomiting (OR 3.45). Younger patients (18-40 years) were more likely to express discomfort than both groups of older patients (41-60 years and 61-89 years). Accordingly, younger patients had lower satisfaction levels with respect to both anesthesia and overall perioperative care, and the progress of recovery. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were linked to younger age, female sex, and longer procedure times (>40 min).

Conclusion: The individual analyses delivered plausible results, which support the validity of the ANP. The ANP may also be used for assessment of postoperative discomfort and patient satisfaction in the setting of outpatient surgery. In view of the short time interval between the two measurement points, the ANP for outpatients could in future be reduced to a single postoperative questionnaire.

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
【门诊患者麻醉问卷:门诊手术后患者健康状况的麻醉问卷调查】。
背景:德国麻醉后问卷的评估通常局限于住院病人的医疗护理。患者麻醉问卷(ANP)以前仅在住院患者的医疗护理后进行验证。因此,本研究的目的是评估ANP在门诊手术和麻醉中的有效性。方法:对4547例门诊骨科和创伤外科患者(平均年龄18-89岁 岁,性别:男/女,55%/45%)的资料进行分析。所有患者均接受异丙酚、舒芬太尼和4 mg地塞米松的标准麻醉诱导。维持麻醉的平衡技术包括挥发性麻醉(七氟醚或地氟醚)和舒芬太尼。此外,接受前交叉韧带手术的患者接受股神经阻滞12-15 ml 0.5%罗哌卡因。13%的患者因复杂手术(前后交叉韧带联合修复、髋关节镜检查)而住院过夜,10%的患者接受肩部手术。出院前,患者被要求回答麻醉后1小时的术后症状(ESNA 19项)、访谈时的症状(ABZ 17项)和患者总体满意度(10项)。这些结果与患者管理系统的手术类型和时间数据相匹配。使用参数检验对所有数据进行描述性分析。结果:在两个时间点,手术区域疼痛是主要症状(ESNA: 77.1%;ABZ: 74年,3%)。肩关节镜术后疼痛比膝关节镜更严重,无论是前交叉韧带修复还是未修复。随着时间的推移,大多数不良症状明显减轻(p ≤ 0.001),表明患者逐渐康复。女性患者比男性患者更容易出现患者不适,女性患者对康复进展更不满意。女性麻醉后出现不良症状的风险高于男性患者;这在感觉寒冷(优势比为4.08)和恶心呕吐(优势比为3.45)时最为明显。年轻患者(18-40 岁)比两组老年患者(41-60 岁和61-89 岁)更容易表现出不适。因此,年轻患者对麻醉和整体围手术期护理以及康复进展的满意度较低。术后恶心呕吐(PONV)与年龄较小、女性和手术时间较长有关(>40 min)。结论:个体分析提供了可信的结果,支持ANP的有效性。ANP也可用于评估术后不适和门诊手术患者满意度。鉴于两个测量点之间的时间间隔较短,门诊患者的ANP可以在未来减少为单一的术后问卷。
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
Anaesthesist
Anaesthesist 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Der Anaesthesist is an internationally recognized journal de­aling with all aspects of anaesthesia and intensive medicine up to pain therapy. Der Anaesthesist addresses all specialists and scientists particularly interested in anaesthesiology and it is neighbouring areas. Review articles provide an overview on selected topics reflecting the multidisciplinary environment including pharmacotherapy, intensive medicine, emergency medicine, regional anaesthetics, pain therapy and medical law. Freely submitted original papers allow the presentation of relevant clinical studies and serve the scientific exchange. Case reports feature interesting cases and aim at optimizing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. Review articles under the rubric ''Continuing Medical Education'' present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice.
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of the effects of total intravenous anesthesia and inhalation anesthesia on postoperative cognitive recovery. [Respiratory support in COVID-19: all in due time!] [COVID-19: a chance for digitalization of teaching? : Report of experiences and results of a survey on digitalized teaching in the fields of anesthesiology, intensive care, emergency, pain and palliative medicine at the University of Leipzig]. [Perioperative management of the brain-dead organ donor : Anesthesia between ethics and evidence]. [Noninvasive respiratory support and invasive ventilation in COVID‑19 : Where do we stand today?]
×
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:481959085
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