Cargando…
Neurosurgical enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme for elective craniotomies: are patients satisfied with their experiences? A quantitative and qualitative analysis
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient satisfaction and associated predictors at discharge, as well as patient experience at 30-day follow-up, in a neurosurgical enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme. DESIGN: A single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled study. SETTING: A tertiary hospital...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6858174/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31712331 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028706 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient satisfaction and associated predictors at discharge, as well as patient experience at 30-day follow-up, in a neurosurgical enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme. DESIGN: A single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled study. SETTING: A tertiary hospital in China. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 140 neurosurgical patients aged 18–65 years old who had a single intracranial lesion and were admitted for elective craniotomy between October 2016 and July 2017 were included. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised into two groups: 70 patients received care according to a novel neurosurgical ERAS protocol (ERAS group) and 70 patients received conventional perioperative care (control group). OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient satisfaction at discharge was evaluated using a multimodal questionnaire. A secondary analysis of patient experience regarding participation in the ERAS programme was conducted using a semistructured qualitative interview via telephone at 30-day follow-up. RESULTS: The mean patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the ERAS group than in the control group at discharge (92.2±4.3 vs 86.8±7.4, p=0.0001). The most important predictors of patient satisfaction included age (OR=6.934), postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score (OR=0.184), absorbable skin suture (OR=0.007) and postoperative length of stay (LOS) (OR=0.765). Analysis on patient experience revealed five themes: information transfer, professional support, shared responsibility and active participation, readiness for discharge, and follow-up, all of which are closely related and represent positive and negative aspects. CONCLUSIONS: Measures that include decreasing PONV VAS score, incorporating absorbable skin suture and shortening LOS seem to increase patient satisfaction in a neurosurgical ERAS programme. Analysis of data on patient experience highlights several aspects to achieve patient-centred and high-quality care. Further studies are warranted to standardise the assessment of patient satisfaction and experience in planning, employing and appraising the ERAS programme. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-INR-16009662. |
---|