反馈训练对门诊外科术后早期恢复和焦虑评分的作用:一项长期趋势研究。

IF 0.9 Q4 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Journal of Critical Care Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-31 eCollection Date: 2024-10-01 DOI:10.2478/jccm-2024-0036
Alexander Dukhan, Teymur Yusupov, Naama Kabra, Tiberiu Ezri, Mona Boaz
{"title":"反馈训练对门诊外科术后早期恢复和焦虑评分的作用:一项长期趋势研究。","authors":"Alexander Dukhan, Teymur Yusupov, Naama Kabra, Tiberiu Ezri, Mona Boaz","doi":"10.2478/jccm-2024-0036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We used a ten-item postoperative quality of recovery score (QoR-10) to assess the perioperative quality of care in an in-hospital ambulatory surgical unit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In Phase 1 of this secular trend study (n=300 patients, 3-months duration), we collected QoR-10 scores and potential confounders, including type of anesthesia and surgery; co-morbidities; and anesthesia components of the Amsterdam scale-measured anxiety scores. Phase 2 was the one-month performance feedback learning phase in which modifiable variables identified in Phase 1 were translated to actionable steps, reinforcing the already existing routine of our department's clinical practices, including pain, shivering and anxiety. The anesthesiology team was instructed and reminded of these steps using performance feedback methods. In Phase 3 (n=300 patients, 3-month duration) we evaluated the efficacy of this performance feedback instruction. QoR-10 scores were compared between Phase 1 and Phase 3.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Phase 1 identified three modifiable variables as targets for improvement: postoperative shivering; percentage of patients with numerical rating pain scale (NRS)<4; and preoperative anxiety from anesthesia scores. Compared to Phase 1, significantly fewer Phase 3 patients had severe shivering (2.3% vs. 7.3%, p = 0.023), and a greater percentage had NRS < 4 points (79% vs. 49.7%, p <0.001). The percentage of patients with a high anxiety score did not differ between phases. A direct association between anxiety score and QoR-10 score was not detected. The QoR-10 score (median (IQR)) was significantly higher in Phase 3 than Phase 1: 50 (49-50) vs. 49(49-50), p<0.001. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, odds for a QoR-10 score of 49-50 were 1.92 higher in Phase 3 than Phase 1.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Considering the study limitations, team feedback education contributed to improvement of the QoR-10 score, reduced the proportion of patients with severe shivering and increased the percentage of patients with low pain scores.</p>","PeriodicalId":44227,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Critical Care Medicine","volume":"10 4","pages":"353-360"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11740697/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Role of Feedback Training on Early Postoperative Recovery and Anxiety Scores in an Ambulatory Surgical Unit: A Secular Trend Study.\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Dukhan, Teymur Yusupov, Naama Kabra, Tiberiu Ezri, Mona Boaz\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/jccm-2024-0036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We used a ten-item postoperative quality of recovery score (QoR-10) to assess the perioperative quality of care in an in-hospital ambulatory surgical unit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In Phase 1 of this secular trend study (n=300 patients, 3-months duration), we collected QoR-10 scores and potential confounders, including type of anesthesia and surgery; co-morbidities; and anesthesia components of the Amsterdam scale-measured anxiety scores. Phase 2 was the one-month performance feedback learning phase in which modifiable variables identified in Phase 1 were translated to actionable steps, reinforcing the already existing routine of our department's clinical practices, including pain, shivering and anxiety. The anesthesiology team was instructed and reminded of these steps using performance feedback methods. In Phase 3 (n=300 patients, 3-month duration) we evaluated the efficacy of this performance feedback instruction. QoR-10 scores were compared between Phase 1 and Phase 3.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Phase 1 identified three modifiable variables as targets for improvement: postoperative shivering; percentage of patients with numerical rating pain scale (NRS)<4; and preoperative anxiety from anesthesia scores. Compared to Phase 1, significantly fewer Phase 3 patients had severe shivering (2.3% vs. 7.3%, p = 0.023), and a greater percentage had NRS < 4 points (79% vs. 49.7%, p <0.001). The percentage of patients with a high anxiety score did not differ between phases. A direct association between anxiety score and QoR-10 score was not detected. The QoR-10 score (median (IQR)) was significantly higher in Phase 3 than Phase 1: 50 (49-50) vs. 49(49-50), p<0.001. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, odds for a QoR-10 score of 49-50 were 1.92 higher in Phase 3 than Phase 1.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Considering the study limitations, team feedback education contributed to improvement of the QoR-10 score, reduced the proportion of patients with severe shivering and increased the percentage of patients with low pain scores.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44227,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Critical Care Medicine\",\"volume\":\"10 4\",\"pages\":\"353-360\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11740697/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Critical Care Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/jccm-2024-0036\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jccm-2024-0036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:我们采用10项术后恢复质量评分(QoR-10)来评估住院门诊外科的围手术期护理质量。方法:在这项长期趋势研究的1期研究中(n=300例患者,持续3个月),我们收集了QoR-10评分和潜在的混杂因素,包括麻醉和手术类型;并发症;以及阿姆斯特丹量表测量焦虑分数的麻醉成分。第二阶段是为期一个月的绩效反馈学习阶段,将第一阶段确定的可修改变量转化为可操作的步骤,强化科室现有的临床实践常规,包括疼痛、颤抖和焦虑。麻醉师团队被指示并使用性能反馈方法提醒这些步骤。在第三阶段(n=300例患者,持续3个月),我们评估了这种表现反馈指导的疗效。比较第一阶段和第三阶段的QoR-10评分。结果:第一阶段确定了三个可修改的变量作为改善目标:术后颤抖;结论:考虑到研究的局限性,团队反馈教育有助于提高QoR-10评分,减少严重寒战患者的比例,增加疼痛评分较低的患者的比例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Role of Feedback Training on Early Postoperative Recovery and Anxiety Scores in an Ambulatory Surgical Unit: A Secular Trend Study.

Background: We used a ten-item postoperative quality of recovery score (QoR-10) to assess the perioperative quality of care in an in-hospital ambulatory surgical unit.

Methods: In Phase 1 of this secular trend study (n=300 patients, 3-months duration), we collected QoR-10 scores and potential confounders, including type of anesthesia and surgery; co-morbidities; and anesthesia components of the Amsterdam scale-measured anxiety scores. Phase 2 was the one-month performance feedback learning phase in which modifiable variables identified in Phase 1 were translated to actionable steps, reinforcing the already existing routine of our department's clinical practices, including pain, shivering and anxiety. The anesthesiology team was instructed and reminded of these steps using performance feedback methods. In Phase 3 (n=300 patients, 3-month duration) we evaluated the efficacy of this performance feedback instruction. QoR-10 scores were compared between Phase 1 and Phase 3.

Results: Phase 1 identified three modifiable variables as targets for improvement: postoperative shivering; percentage of patients with numerical rating pain scale (NRS)<4; and preoperative anxiety from anesthesia scores. Compared to Phase 1, significantly fewer Phase 3 patients had severe shivering (2.3% vs. 7.3%, p = 0.023), and a greater percentage had NRS < 4 points (79% vs. 49.7%, p <0.001). The percentage of patients with a high anxiety score did not differ between phases. A direct association between anxiety score and QoR-10 score was not detected. The QoR-10 score (median (IQR)) was significantly higher in Phase 3 than Phase 1: 50 (49-50) vs. 49(49-50), p<0.001. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, odds for a QoR-10 score of 49-50 were 1.92 higher in Phase 3 than Phase 1.

Conclusion: Considering the study limitations, team feedback education contributed to improvement of the QoR-10 score, reduced the proportion of patients with severe shivering and increased the percentage of patients with low pain scores.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Critical Care Medicine
Journal of Critical Care Medicine CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
9.10%
发文量
21
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Role of Quetiapine in the Prevention of ICU Delirium in Elderly Patients at a High Risk. The Analgesic Effect of Morphine on Peripheral Opioid Receptors: An Experimental Research. Outcome and Determining Characteristics of ICU Patients with Acute Kidney Injury in a Low-Income Country, a Multicenter Experience. Outcomes of Patients Transferred to Tertiary Center by Life-Saving System in Saudi Arabia. A Propensity Score Matching Observational Study. The Correlation of Hemostatic Parameters with the Development of Early Sepsis-Associated Encephalopathy. A Retrospective Observational Study.
×
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