OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the results of the introduction of new measures to accelerate the postoperative recovery of patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery. METHODS: We observed 162 patients and interviewed them on two distinct periods: the first between October to December 2009 (n = 81) comprised patients who underwent conventional perioperative monitoring (pre-intervention) and the second between March and May 2010 (n = 81), formed by a new group of patients, submitted to the new protocol of perioperative monitoring. Data collection in the two periods occurred without the knowledge of the professionals in the service. The variables were: indication for preoperative nutritional support, duration of fasting, post-operative volume of hydration, use of catheters and drains, length of stay and postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: when comparing the two periods we observed a decrease of 2.5 hours in the time of preoperative fasting (p = 0.0002) in the post-intervention group. As for the reintroduction of oral diet, there was no difference between the two periods (p = 0.0007). When considering the patients without postoperative complications, there was a significantly decreased length of stay (p = 0.001325). There was a reduction of approximately 50% in antibiotic use in the post-intervention group (p = 0.00001). CONCLUSION: The adoption of multidisciplinary perioperative measures is feasible within our reality, and although there was no statistically significant changes in the present study, it may improve morbidity and reduce length of stay in general surgery.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the results of the introduction of new measures to accelerate the postoperative recovery of patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery. METHODS: We observed 162 patients and interviewed them on two distinct periods: the first between October to December 2009 (n = 81) comprised patients who underwent conventional perioperative monitoring (pre-intervention) and the second between March and May 2010 (n = 81), formed by a new group of patients, submitted to the new protocol of perioperative monitoring. Data collection in the two periods occurred without the knowledge of the professionals in the service. The variables were: indication for preoperative nutritional support, duration of fasting, post-operative volume of hydration, use of catheters and drains, length of stay and postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: when comparing the two periods we observed a decrease of 2.5 hours in the time of preoperative fasting (p = 0.0002) in the post-intervention group. As for the reintroduction of oral diet, there was no difference between the two periods (p = 0.0007). When considering the patients without postoperative complications, there was a significantly decreased length of stay (p = 0.001325). There was a reduction of approximately 50% in antibiotic use in the post-intervention group (p = 0.00001). CONCLUSION: The adoption of multidisciplinary perioperative measures is feasible within our reality, and although there was no statistically significant changes in the present study, it may improve morbidity and reduce length of stay in general surgery.