Elizabeth Dickson1, Peter A Argenta, John A Reichert. 1. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women's Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn., USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review the impact of implementing a rapid recovery protocol (RRP) for patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy. SETTING: Metropolitan teaching hospital. POPULATION: Women undergoing abdominal hysterectomy for non-malignant indications. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive cases performed during study periods before and after the introduction of an elective rapid recovery program emphasizing regional anesthesia. To control for universal improvements in medical practice, charts from a comparable local hospital without an RRP were also reviewed. RESULTS: 400 charts were reviewed and 366 cases met inclusion criteria and had sufficient information. Patients were well matched for demographic and medical variables between the study periods and between the institutions. The median length of stay (LOS) fell dramatically from 3 (range 1-12) days prior to RRP introduction to 1 (range 1-17) day after RRP (p < 0.001). LOS among patients at the 'control' institution remained unchanged at 3 days during the same time frame, indicating that external pressures contributed minimally to the observed changes. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, duration of surgery, or complication rate between the groups in either time period. CONCLUSIONS: Introducing a rapid recovery program was associated with shorter hospitalization and did not appear to compromise surgical outcome.
OBJECTIVE: To review the impact of implementing a rapid recovery protocol (RRP) for patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy. SETTING: Metropolitan teaching hospital. POPULATION: Women undergoing abdominal hysterectomy for non-malignant indications. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive cases performed during study periods before and after the introduction of an elective rapid recovery program emphasizing regional anesthesia. To control for universal improvements in medical practice, charts from a comparable local hospital without an RRP were also reviewed. RESULTS: 400 charts were reviewed and 366 cases met inclusion criteria and had sufficient information. Patients were well matched for demographic and medical variables between the study periods and between the institutions. The median length of stay (LOS) fell dramatically from 3 (range 1-12) days prior to RRP introduction to 1 (range 1-17) day after RRP (p < 0.001). LOS among patients at the 'control' institution remained unchanged at 3 days during the same time frame, indicating that external pressures contributed minimally to the observed changes. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, duration of surgery, or complication rate between the groups in either time period. CONCLUSIONS: Introducing a rapid recovery program was associated with shorter hospitalization and did not appear to compromise surgical outcome.
Authors: K C H Fearon; O Ljungqvist; M Von Meyenfeldt; A Revhaug; C H C Dejong; K Lassen; J Nygren; J Hausel; M Soop; J Andersen; H Kehlet Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2005-04-21 Impact factor: 7.324
Authors: Sven Muller; Marco P Zalunardo; Martin Hubner; Pierre A Clavien; Nicolas Demartines Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2008-11-01 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: C Møller; H Kehlet; S G Friland; L O Schouenborg; C Lund; B Ottesen Journal: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 2.435
Authors: Susanne J Pedersen; Finn M Borgbjerg; Birgitte Schousboe; Bente D Pedersen; Henrik L Jørgensen; Benn R Duus; Jes B Lauritzen Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Ester Miralpeix; Alpa M Nick; Larissa A Meyer; Juan Cata; Javier Lasala; Gabriel E Mena; Vijaya Gottumukkala; Maria Iniesta-Donate; Gloria Salvo; Pedro T Ramirez Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Elisa R Trowbridge; Caitlin N Dreisbach; Bethany M Sarosiek; Catherine Page Dunbar; Sarah Larkin Evans; Lee Anne Hahn; Kathie L Hullfish Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-09-04 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Sarah P Huepenbecker; Maria D Iniesta; Andrés Zorrilla-Vaca; Pedro T Ramirez; Katherine E Cain; Micah Vaughn; Juan P Cata; Gabriel E Mena; Javier Lasala; Larissa A Meyer Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2021-08-13 Impact factor: 5.304