BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the second most common general surgical operation performed in the United States, yet little has been reported on patient-centered outcomes. METHODS: We prospectively followed 100 patients for 2 years as part of an institutional review board-approved study. The Surgical Outcomes Measurement System (SOMS) was used to quantify quality-of-life (QoL) values at various time points postoperatively. RESULTS: Maximum pain was reported at 24 h (5.5 ± 2.2), and decreased to preoperative levels at 7 days (1.2 ± 2.3 vs. 2.0 ± 1.6, P = 0.096). Bowel function improved from before the operation to 3 weeks after surgery (10.7 ± 3.8 vs. 12.0 ± 3.2, P < 0.05), but then regressed to preoperative levels. Physical function worsened from before surgery (31.7 ± 6.2) to 1 week (27.5 ± 5.9, P < 0.0001), but surpassed preoperative levels at 3 weeks (33.5 ± 3.4, P < 0.01). Return to the activities of daily living occurred at 6.3 ± 4.7 days and work at 11.1 ± 9.0 days. Fatigue increased from before surgery (15.8 ± 6.2) to week 1 (20.7 ± 6.6, P < 0.0001) before improving at week 3 (14.0 ± 5.8, P < 0.01). Forty-four patients contacted the health care team 61 times before their 3 weeks appointment, most commonly for wound issues (26.2%), pain (24.6%), and gastrointestinal issues (24.6%). Seventy-two percent reported that the procedure had no negative effect on cosmesis at 6 months. Satisfaction with the procedure was high, averaging 9.52 out of 11. CONCLUSIONS: QoL is significantly affected in the 24 h after LC but returns to baseline at week 3. Cosmesis and overall satisfaction are high, and QoL improvements are maintained in the long term except for bowel function, which regresses to preoperative levels of impairment. Analysis of patient-initiated contacts after LC may provide feedback on discharge counseling to increase patient satisfaction.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the second most common general surgical operation performed in the United States, yet little has been reported on patient-centered outcomes. METHODS: We prospectively followed 100 patients for 2 years as part of an institutional review board-approved study. The Surgical Outcomes Measurement System (SOMS) was used to quantify quality-of-life (QoL) values at various time points postoperatively. RESULTS: Maximum pain was reported at 24 h (5.5 ± 2.2), and decreased to preoperative levels at 7 days (1.2 ± 2.3 vs. 2.0 ± 1.6, P = 0.096). Bowel function improved from before the operation to 3 weeks after surgery (10.7 ± 3.8 vs. 12.0 ± 3.2, P < 0.05), but then regressed to preoperative levels. Physical function worsened from before surgery (31.7 ± 6.2) to 1 week (27.5 ± 5.9, P < 0.0001), but surpassed preoperative levels at 3 weeks (33.5 ± 3.4, P < 0.01). Return to the activities of daily living occurred at 6.3 ± 4.7 days and work at 11.1 ± 9.0 days. Fatigue increased from before surgery (15.8 ± 6.2) to week 1 (20.7 ± 6.6, P < 0.0001) before improving at week 3 (14.0 ± 5.8, P < 0.01). Forty-four patients contacted the health care team 61 times before their 3 weeks appointment, most commonly for wound issues (26.2%), pain (24.6%), and gastrointestinal issues (24.6%). Seventy-two percent reported that the procedure had no negative effect on cosmesis at 6 months. Satisfaction with the procedure was high, averaging 9.52 out of 11. CONCLUSIONS: QoL is significantly affected in the 24 h after LC but returns to baseline at week 3. Cosmesis and overall satisfaction are high, and QoL improvements are maintained in the long term except for bowel function, which regresses to preoperative levels of impairment. Analysis of patient-initiated contacts after LC may provide feedback on discharge counseling to increase patient satisfaction.
Authors: Gonzalo Garcia Guerra; Charlene M T Robertson; Gwen Y Alton; Ari R Joffe; Irina A Dinu; David Nicholas; David B Ross; Ivan M Rebeyka Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2012-04-14 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: M A Qureshi; P E Burke; N M Brindley; A L Leahy; D H Osborne; P J Broe; D J Bouchier-Hayes; P A Grace Journal: Ann R Coll Surg Engl Date: 1993-09 Impact factor: 1.891
Authors: Gerd H Sauter; Ahmed C Moussavian; Guenther Meyer; Heinrich O Steitz; Klaus G Parhofer; Dieter Jüngst Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Otto S Lin; Richard A Kozarek; Andrew Arai; S Ian Gan; Michael Gluck; Geoffrey C Jiranek; Kris V Kowdley; George Triadafilopoulos Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Hans J Gerbershagen; Sanjay Aduckathil; Albert J M van Wijck; Linda M Peelen; Cor J Kalkman; Winfried Meissner Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Harry C Alexander; Cindy H Nguyen; Matthew R Moore; Adam S Bartlett; Jacqueline A Hannam; Garth H Poole; Alan F Merry Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Mark P Lamberts; Brenda L Den Oudsten; Frederik Keus; Jolanda De Vries; Cornelis J H M van Laarhoven; Gert P Westert; Joost P H Drenth; Jan A Roukema Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-06-21 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Malcolm H W Mak; Woon Ling Chew; Sameer P Junnarkar; Winston W L Woon; Jee-Keem Low; Terence C W Huey; Vishalkumar G Shelat Journal: Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg Date: 2019-02-28
Authors: Sarah Wennmacker; Mark Lamberts; Jos Gerritsen; Jan Anne Roukema; Gert Westert; Joost Drenth; Cornelis van Laarhoven Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 4.584