OBJECTIVE: To assess the care provided to patients with congenital heart diseases and ischemic heart diseases undergoing cardiac surgery according to the fast-track recovery protocol compared with those undergoing the conventional procedure. METHODS: The transfer of patients from one hospital unit to another was assessed for 175 patients, 107 (61%) men and 68 (39%) women, with ages ranging from 0.3 to 81 years. RESULTS: The discharge rate from the different hospital units per unit of time of the patients with congenital heart diseases treated according to the fast-track recovery protocol compared with that of patients conventionally treated was as follows: a) 11.3 times faster than the discharge rate of patients treated according to the conventional protocol, in regard to the time spent in the operating room; b) 6.3 times faster in regard to the duration of the surgical intervention; c) 6.8 times faster in regard to the duration of anesthesia; d) 1.5 times faster in regard to the duration of perfusion; e) 2.8 times faster in regard to the stay in the postoperative recovery I unit; f) 6.7 times faster in regard to hospital stay (time period between hospital admission and hospital discharge); g) 2.8 times faster in regard to the stay in the preoperative unit; h) 2.1 times faster in regard to the stay in the admission unit after discharge from postoperative recovery; i) associated with reduced costs. The difference was not significant for patients with ischemic heart disease. CONCLUSION: A reduction in the length of hospital stay and costs for the care of patients undergoing cardiac surgery according to the fast-track protocol was observed.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the care provided to patients with congenital heart diseases and ischemic heart diseases undergoing cardiac surgery according to the fast-track recovery protocol compared with those undergoing the conventional procedure. METHODS: The transfer of patients from one hospital unit to another was assessed for 175 patients, 107 (61%) men and 68 (39%) women, with ages ranging from 0.3 to 81 years. RESULTS: The discharge rate from the different hospital units per unit of time of the patients with congenital heart diseases treated according to the fast-track recovery protocol compared with that of patients conventionally treated was as follows: a) 11.3 times faster than the discharge rate of patients treated according to the conventional protocol, in regard to the time spent in the operating room; b) 6.3 times faster in regard to the duration of the surgical intervention; c) 6.8 times faster in regard to the duration of anesthesia; d) 1.5 times faster in regard to the duration of perfusion; e) 2.8 times faster in regard to the stay in the postoperative recovery I unit; f) 6.7 times faster in regard to hospital stay (time period between hospital admission and hospital discharge); g) 2.8 times faster in regard to the stay in the preoperative unit; h) 2.1 times faster in regard to the stay in the admission unit after discharge from postoperative recovery; i) associated with reduced costs. The difference was not significant for patients with ischemic heart disease. CONCLUSION: A reduction in the length of hospital stay and costs for the care of patients undergoing cardiac surgery according to the fast-track protocol was observed.
Authors: Christoph P Hornik; Xia He; Jeffrey P Jacobs; Jennifer S Li; Robert D B Jaquiss; Marshall L Jacobs; Sean M O'Brien; Eric D Peterson; Sara K Pasquali Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2011-09-19 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Danielle S Burstein; Jeffrey P Jacobs; Jennifer S Li; Shubin Sheng; Sean M O'Brien; Anthony F Rossi; Paul A Checchia; Gil Wernovsky; Karl F Welke; Eric D Peterson; Marshall L Jacobs; Sara K Pasquali Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2011-05-16 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Sara K Pasquali; Jie-Lena Sun; Phil d'Almada; Robert D B Jaquiss; Andrew J Lodge; Neal Miller; Alex R Kemper; Carole M Lannon; Jennifer S Li Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2011-04-19
Authors: Elizabeth D Brouwer; David Watkins; Zachary Olson; Jane Goett; Rachel Nugent; Carol Levin Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-11-26 Impact factor: 3.295