Yael Keshet1, Samuel Attias2, Eran Ben-Arye3, Miri Shaham4, Ofra Grimberg5, Elad Schiff6. 1. Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Western Galilee Academic College , Akko, Israel . 2. Complementary/Integrative Surgery Service, Bnai Zion Medical Center , Haifa, Israel . 3. Lin Medical Center , Clalit Health Services, Haifa and Western Galilee District, Israel . 4. PACU Service, Bnai Zion Medical Center , Haifa, Israel . 5. Surgery Department, Bnai Zion Medical Center , Haifa, Israel . 6. Internal Medicine Department, Bnai Zion Medical Center , and The International Center for Health, Law & Ethics, Haifa, Israel .
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A unique integrative complementary medicine (CM) pilot program was launched in a general surgery department at a public teaching hospital in Israel. In addition to standard supportive care, CM treatments are used to support patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in coping with perioperative distresses. We examined the experiences of patients and how the nursing staff evaluate these treatments. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured open-ended interviews were used. RESULTS: Most patients reported that the treatments helped them to cope better with preoperative anxiety, and facilitated postoperative breathing and pain relief. Nurses reported that CM treatments enabled them to reduce doses of analgesics. Both patients and nurses suggested that preoperative CM treatment facilitated a better postoperative CM-associated outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Integrative perioperative CM treatments improved pain and anxiety care in patients undergoing LSG. More research is needed to examine CM efficacy in improving standard LSG perioperative supportive care and to evaluate cost effectiveness.
BACKGROUND: A unique integrative complementary medicine (CM) pilot program was launched in a general surgery department at a public teaching hospital in Israel. In addition to standard supportive care, CM treatments are used to support patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in coping with perioperative distresses. We examined the experiences of patients and how the nursing staff evaluate these treatments. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured open-ended interviews were used. RESULTS: Most patients reported that the treatments helped them to cope better with preoperative anxiety, and facilitated postoperative breathing and pain relief. Nurses reported that CM treatments enabled them to reduce doses of analgesics. Both patients and nurses suggested that preoperative CM treatment facilitated a better postoperative CM-associated outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Integrative perioperative CM treatments improved pain and anxiety care in patients undergoing LSG. More research is needed to examine CM efficacy in improving standard LSG perioperative supportive care and to evaluate cost effectiveness.