Literature DB >> 24417321

Recovery after nasal surgery vs. tonsillectomy: discriminant validation of the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale.

C F Royse1, Z Williams, S Purser, S Newman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Initial validation and feasibility of the Post-Operative Quality of Recovery Scale (PQRS) was published in 2010. Ongoing validation includes studies to determine whether this scale can discriminate differences in recovery in similar patients having different surgery.
METHODS: A prospective observational study included 89 patients undergoing nasal surgery and 46 patients undergoing tonsillectomy as the primary surgical procedure. Patients were assessed using the PQRS. Assessments were performed pre-surgery, at 15 and 40 min, 1 and 3 days, and 3 months after surgery.
RESULTS: Tonsillectomy patients were younger [25.0 standard deviation (SD) 17.8 vs. 32.1 SD 18.0 years, P = 0.031] and had shorter anaesthesia duration (29.5 SD 12.6 vs. 42.7 SD 15.8 min, P < 0.01). Tonsillectomy patients had worse recovery in the nociceptive (pain and nausea; P < 0.001), activities of daily living (P < 0.001) and overall recovery (P = 0.025) domains, but were not different in the cognitive, emotive (depression and anxiety) or physiological recovery domains. Complete satisfaction was lower for tonsillectomy (P < 0.001). At 3 months, there was equivalence between groups in all assessments.
CONCLUSION: The study shows the ability of the PQRS to discriminate recovery in different domains. Tonsillectomy has a worse recovery profile over the first 3 days in nociceptive, activities of daily living and overall recovery, which is associated with poorer satisfaction than nasal surgery.
© 2014 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24417321     DOI: 10.1111/aas.12264

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand        ISSN: 0001-5172            Impact factor:   2.105


  7 in total

1.  Validity and reliability of the Iranian version of the quality of recovery-40 questionnaire.

Authors:  Siamak Yaghoobi; Monadi Hamidfar; Douglas M Lawson; Bengt Fridlund; Paul Stewart Myles; Amir H Pakpour
Journal:  Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2015-04-20

Review 2.  Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine.

Authors:  Siny Tsang; Colin F Royse; Abdullah Sulieman Terkawi
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2017-05

3.  Development and validation of Arabic version of the postoperative quality of recovery scale.

Authors:  Abdullah Sulieman Terkawi; Siny Tsang; Waleed Riad; Sumaya Nemer Nassar; Maissa Mahmoud; Ghadah Jumaan AlKahtani; Hanin Hussain Alsharif; Khalid S Doais; Fatima Jaina Sala; Anas Abdulrahman; Colin F Royse
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2017-05

4.  Evaluation of the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale test and re-test in Swedish among healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Pether Jildenstål; Johan Eriksson; Margareta Warren Stomberg; Jan G Jakobsson
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2016-10-21

5.  Can simple perioperative measures improve quality of recovery following ambulatory laparoscopic surgery in females? An open prospective randomised cohort study, comparing nutritional preoperative drink and chewing gum during recovery to standard care.

Authors:  Emma Öbrink; Johanna Lerström; Christian Hillström; Eva Oddby; Jan G Jakobsson
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2019-06-08

6.  The validation of a Japanese language version of the postoperative quality of recovery scale: a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Koki Yamashita; Stuart Boggett; Yoshifumi Kodama; Isao Tsuneyoshi; Colin Royse
Journal:  JA Clin Rep       Date:  2021-04-09

7.  Deep Neuromuscular Blockade Combined with Low Pneumoperitoneum Pressure for Nociceptive Recovery After Major Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Yu-Qin Long; Xi-Sheng Shan; Xiao-Mei Feng; Hong Liu; Fu-Hai Ji; Ke Peng
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2021-11-16       Impact factor: 3.133

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.