Paolino Luca1, Couteau Nicolas2, Vignot Marina2, Batahei Sarah2, Lazzati Andrea2,3. 1. Department of General Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, 40 avenue de Verdun, 94000, Créteil, France. luca.paolino@chicreteil.fr. 2. Department of General Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, 40 avenue de Verdun, 94000, Créteil, France. 3. INSERM IMRB U955, Université Paris-Est Créteil, Créteil, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Follow-up is a cornerstone of the success of bariatric surgery. However, adherence to monitoring decreases over time. The reasons for non-compliance with follow-up still remain unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective, single-center, cohort study, including all patients undergoing bariatric surgery between 2014 and 2017. Patients lost to follow-up were called back and questioned about the reasons of non-adherence. Patients followed and lost to follow-up were compared in terms of weight loss. RESULTS: Overall, 29.7% of patients were lost to follow-up. After a callback, we obtained information on 89.9% of patients. The first reason of non-attendance was considering follow-up as unnecessary (29.5%). Almost a quarter of patients (24%) discontinued follow-up due to geographic distance, while 23.3%, 18.6%, and 14.0% of patients explained the lack of follow-up due to family, professional, or health problems. Only 7.0% declared to renounce to follow-up because of poor weight loss. Percentage of excess weight loss at 3 and 5 years after surgery was respectively 73.6% and 81.2% in attendant patients, and 70.7% and 68.4% in non-adherent patients (p = ns). Despite a greater weight loss in the group of patients regularly followed, the difference with patients lost to follow-up remained not significant in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Follow-up is of crucial importance in the management of bariatric patients. Follow-up disruption is associated to individual patient choice and external constraints. In order to improve the quality of long-term care, care providers will probably need to adapt to these constraints, diversifying the offer of care.
PURPOSE: Follow-up is a cornerstone of the success of bariatric surgery. However, adherence to monitoring decreases over time. The reasons for non-compliance with follow-up still remain unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective, single-center, cohort study, including all patients undergoing bariatric surgery between 2014 and 2017. Patients lost to follow-up were called back and questioned about the reasons of non-adherence. Patients followed and lost to follow-up were compared in terms of weight loss. RESULTS: Overall, 29.7% of patients were lost to follow-up. After a callback, we obtained information on 89.9% of patients. The first reason of non-attendance was considering follow-up as unnecessary (29.5%). Almost a quarter of patients (24%) discontinued follow-up due to geographic distance, while 23.3%, 18.6%, and 14.0% of patients explained the lack of follow-up due to family, professional, or health problems. Only 7.0% declared to renounce to follow-up because of poor weight loss. Percentage of excess weight loss at 3 and 5 years after surgery was respectively 73.6% and 81.2% in attendant patients, and 70.7% and 68.4% in non-adherent patients (p = ns). Despite a greater weight loss in the group of patients regularly followed, the difference with patients lost to follow-up remained not significant in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Follow-up is of crucial importance in the management of bariatric patients. Follow-up disruption is associated to individual patient choice and external constraints. In order to improve the quality of long-term care, care providers will probably need to adapt to these constraints, diversifying the offer of care.
Authors: Kelly G H van de Pas; Daniëlle S Bonouvrie; Loes Janssen; Marleen M Romeijn; Arijan A P M Luijten; Wouter K G Leclercq; François M H van Dielen Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2022-01-29 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Marleen M Romeijn; Stijn van Hoef; Loes Janssen; Kelly G H van de Pas; François M H van Dielen; Arijan A P M Luijten; Kevin W A Göttgens; Jan Willem M Greve; Wouter K G Leclercq Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2021-04-27 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Dirk Versteegden; Magaly van Himbeeck; Anne W Burghoorn; Peter Lovei; Eva Deckers; Jos-Marien Jansen; Simon Nienhuijs Journal: JMIR Form Res Date: 2022-05-06