W R Fleming1, I Michell, M Douglas. 1. Department of Surgery, Austin and Repatriation Medical Centre, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia. Bill.Fleming@bigpond.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because the postoperative stay after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has shortened, it seemed that outpatient LC would be feasible. The aim of this study was to prospectively audit initial experience with outpatient LC at the Austin and Repatriation Medical Centre. We aimed to determine appropriate patient selection criteria, to devise anaesthetic and discharge protocols and to assess patient satisfaction at follow up. METHODS: All patients presenting for LC were assessed for suitability, and those elective cases unlikely to have a duct stone and fulfilling the social criteria were studied. After standard anaesthetic and LC technique, patients recovered in the day surgery unit for up to 8 h and were discharged if stable. The hospital in the home nursing service monitored patients for 48 h and arranged readmission if needed. Patient satisfaction was assessed by independent telephone questionnaire 6 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS: Forty-five patients (median age 43 years) underwent outpatient LC with a discharge rate of 82.3%, resulting in a cost saving of $984 per patient treated. One patient was readmitted, giving an overall success rate of 80%. After stricter implementation of the protocol in the second half of the study, the discharge rate rose to 92%. Patient acceptance of the technique was high at 84.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the first 45 patients show that it is possible to safely perform outpatient LC with a low admission rate in fit, elective patients who live close to medical care. Provided a strict anaesthetic protocol is followed, the technique has good patient acceptance and provides some economic benefit to the hospital.
BACKGROUND: Because the postoperative stay after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has shortened, it seemed that outpatient LC would be feasible. The aim of this study was to prospectively audit initial experience with outpatient LC at the Austin and Repatriation Medical Centre. We aimed to determine appropriate patient selection criteria, to devise anaesthetic and discharge protocols and to assess patient satisfaction at follow up. METHODS: All patients presenting for LC were assessed for suitability, and those elective cases unlikely to have a duct stone and fulfilling the social criteria were studied. After standard anaesthetic and LC technique, patients recovered in the day surgery unit for up to 8 h and were discharged if stable. The hospital in the home nursing service monitored patients for 48 h and arranged readmission if needed. Patient satisfaction was assessed by independent telephone questionnaire 6 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS: Forty-five patients (median age 43 years) underwent outpatient LC with a discharge rate of 82.3%, resulting in a cost saving of $984 per patient treated. One patient was readmitted, giving an overall success rate of 80%. After stricter implementation of the protocol in the second half of the study, the discharge rate rose to 92%. Patient acceptance of the technique was high at 84.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the first 45 patients show that it is possible to safely perform outpatient LC with a low admission rate in fit, elective patients who live close to medical care. Provided a strict anaesthetic protocol is followed, the technique has good patient acceptance and provides some economic benefit to the hospital.
Authors: Maria G Sacco Casamassima; Colin Gause; Jingyan Yang; Seth D Goldstein; Abhishek Swarup; Fizan Abdullah Journal: Pediatr Surg Int Date: 2016-04-01 Impact factor: 1.827