Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Perioperative Medicine 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research

Comparing the experience of enhanced recovery programme for gynaecological patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open gynaecological surgery: a prospective study

Authors: Joanne Lee, Viren Asher, Arun Nair, Victoria White, Catherine Brocklehurst, Martyn Traves, Anish Bali

Published in: Perioperative Medicine | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Enhanced recovery has been shown to improve patients’ experience after surgery. There are no previous studies comparing patients’ experience between those undergoing laparoscopic and open gynaecological surgery. Therefore, the aim of this prospective study is to compare patients’ functional recovery based on milestones set by the enhanced recovery programme and patients’ satisfaction between the two groups.

Methods

All eligible patients undergoing gynaecological surgery within an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme from March to August 2014 were involved in this study. All patients received the questionnaires on admission which were then collected prior to discharge. They were followed up by telephone within 7 days.

Results

Two hundred sixty-three patients were involved. One hundred forty-four questionnaires were returned (54% response rate). Fifty-one percent (n = 74) were from the laparoscopic group and 49% (n = 70) were from the laparotomy group. In terms of achieving milestones, more patients in the laparotomy group performed the deep breathing exercises (laparoscopic versus open; 66.2% versus 87.1% (p = 0.003). The laparoscopic group were more able to eat on day 0, but by day 1, there was no difference between the groups. Both groups were similar in their ability to drink (p = 0.98), mobilise (p = 0.123) and sit out in a chair (p = 0.511). In the laparoscopic group, the patients’ experience was better for pain control (p < 0.0001) and nausea control (p = 0.003) from recovery to day 1, and they were more able to put on their own clothes (p = 0.001) and were more confident in mobilising (p < 0.0001) and in going home (p < 0.0001). The laparoscopic group had greater patient satisfaction with their pain always being well controlled (p < 0.0001) whilst more patients in the laparotomy group reported being satisfied to very satisfied with their overall care on the gynaecology ward (p = 0.04). Both groups were equally satisfied with their care from nursing staff (p = 0.709) and doctors (p = 0.431).

Conclusion

The two groups were in general equally able to achieve the majority of the milestones despite differences in symptoms such as pain, nausea and confidence in mobilising and going home. Pre-operative education can empower patients to engage in their recovery. There is a high level of patient satisfaction in both groups.
Literature
go back to reference Archer S, Montague J, Bali A. Exploring the experience of an enhanced recovery programme for gynaecological cancer patients: a qualitative study. Perioper Med. 2014;3(1):2.CrossRef Archer S, Montague J, Bali A. Exploring the experience of an enhanced recovery programme for gynaecological cancer patients: a qualitative study. Perioper Med. 2014;3(1):2.CrossRef
go back to reference Blazeby JM, et al. A qualitative evaluation of patients’ experiences of an enhanced recovery programme for colorectal cancer. Color Dis. 2010;12(10 Online):e236–42.CrossRef Blazeby JM, et al. A qualitative evaluation of patients’ experiences of an enhanced recovery programme for colorectal cancer. Color Dis. 2010;12(10 Online):e236–42.CrossRef
go back to reference Department of Health, NHS Improvement, National Cancer Action Team (NCAT), NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement. Enhanced recovery partnership project report––March 2011: DOH publication booklet; 2011. Department of Health, NHS Improvement, National Cancer Action Team (NCAT), NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement. Enhanced recovery partnership project report––March 2011: DOH publication booklet; 2011.
go back to reference Kehlet H, Wilmore DW. Evidence-based surgical care and the evolution of fast-track surgery. Ann Surg. 2008;248(2):189–98.CrossRefPubMed Kehlet H, Wilmore DW. Evidence-based surgical care and the evolution of fast-track surgery. Ann Surg. 2008;248(2):189–98.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference King PM, et al. Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme. Br J Surg. 2006;93:300–8.CrossRefPubMed King PM, et al. Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme. Br J Surg. 2006;93:300–8.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Norlyk A, Harder I. After colonic surgery: the lived experience of participating in a fast-track programme. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2009;4:170–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Norlyk A, Harder I. After colonic surgery: the lived experience of participating in a fast-track programme. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2009;4:170–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Norlyk A, Harder I. Recovering at home: participating in a fast-track colon cancer surgery programme. Nurs Inq. 2011;18(2):165–73.CrossRefPubMed Norlyk A, Harder I. Recovering at home: participating in a fast-track colon cancer surgery programme. Nurs Inq. 2011;18(2):165–73.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference O'Dwyer PJ, et al. Patient recovery following cholecystectomy through a 6 cm or 15 cm transverse subcostal incision: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Postgrad Med J. 1992;68(804):817–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral O'Dwyer PJ, et al. Patient recovery following cholecystectomy through a 6 cm or 15 cm transverse subcostal incision: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Postgrad Med J. 1992;68(804):817–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Philp S, et al. Patients’ satisfaction with fast-track surgery in gynaecological oncology. Eur J Cancer Care. 2015;24(4):567–73.CrossRef Philp S, et al. Patients’ satisfaction with fast-track surgery in gynaecological oncology. Eur J Cancer Care. 2015;24(4):567–73.CrossRef
go back to reference Wagner L, et al. Patient and staff (doctors and nurses) experiences of abdominal hysterectomy in accelerated recovery programme. A qualitative study. Dan Med Bull. 2004;51(4):418–21.PubMed Wagner L, et al. Patient and staff (doctors and nurses) experiences of abdominal hysterectomy in accelerated recovery programme. A qualitative study. Dan Med Bull. 2004;51(4):418–21.PubMed
go back to reference Wagner L, et al. Women’s experiences with short admission in abdominal hysterectomy and their patterns of behaviour. Scand J Caring Sci. 2005;19(4):330–6.CrossRefPubMed Wagner L, et al. Women’s experiences with short admission in abdominal hysterectomy and their patterns of behaviour. Scand J Caring Sci. 2005;19(4):330–6.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Wodlin NB, Nilsson L. The development of fast-track principles in gynecological surgery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013;92(1):17–27.CrossRefPubMed Wodlin NB, Nilsson L. The development of fast-track principles in gynecological surgery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013;92(1):17–27.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparing the experience of enhanced recovery programme for gynaecological patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open gynaecological surgery: a prospective study
Authors
Joanne Lee
Viren Asher
Arun Nair
Victoria White
Catherine Brocklehurst
Martyn Traves
Anish Bali
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Perioperative Medicine / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 2047-0525
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13741-018-0096-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Perioperative Medicine 1/2018 Go to the issue