Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorKiyak, H.
dc.contributor.authorSALİHOĞLU, ZİYA
dc.contributor.authorOlmez, F.
dc.contributor.authorBahat, P. Y.
dc.contributor.authorAkca, A.
dc.contributor.authorYilmaz, G.
dc.contributor.authorCan, E.
dc.contributor.authorOmaygenc, D. O.
dc.contributor.authorTuten, N.
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-21T09:19:34Z
dc.date.available2023-02-21T09:19:34Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationYilmaz G., Can E., Omaygenc D. O., Tuten N., Olmez F., Kiyak H., Bahat P. Y., Akca A., SALİHOĞLU Z., "Comparison of enhanced recovery protocol with conventional care in patients undergoing urogynecological surgery", CESKA GYNEKOLOGIE-CZECH GYNAECOLOGY, cilt.87, sa.4, ss.232-238, 2022
dc.identifier.issn1210-7832
dc.identifier.otherav_2c2bc4e2-1a82-4a2d-8b82-6b5eaa565026
dc.identifier.othervv_1032021
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/187383
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.48095/cccg2022232
dc.description.abstract: Objective: The impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol on postoperative outcomes after urogynecological surgery is yet to be a matter of investigation. This study sought to evaluate this issue by comparing the patients who had conventional or ERAS--guidedperioperative care for several clinical end-points including ambulation, length of hospital stay (LOS), readmissions, and postoperative complications.Materials and methods: A total of 121 patients undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery were allocated to two study arms, ERAS protocol (Group E) or conventional care (Group C). Variables reflecting the restoration of appetite and bowel movements, bleeding events, other complications, LOS and readmissions were compared between the groups.Results: The patients in Group C signifi cantly received a more intensive intravenous fluid treatment compared to Group E (2,760 +/- 656 vs. 1,045 +/- 218 mL, P < 0.001). Time required for first flatus, first defecation, eating solid food, and ambulation (P < 0.001) were also longer in the former group of patients. Moreover, LOS was significantly reduced when the ERAS protocol was applied (2.5 +/- 1.1 vs. 2.0 +/- 0.6 days, P < 0.001). On the other hand, the two groups were similar with respect to the frequency of the postoperative complications, including surgical site infections, cardiovascular complications, non-specific abdominal pain, sub-ileus, blood loss and readmission rate. Conclusion: In our sample population, ERAS protocol led to early initiation of oral intake, early recovery of bowel function, early mobilization, and early discharge of patients without compromise in safety concerns after urogynecological surgery.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectCerrahi Tıp Bilimleri
dc.subjectDoğum ve Jinekoloji
dc.subjectKadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum
dc.subjectSağlık Bilimleri
dc.subjectTıp
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp (MED)
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp
dc.subjectKADIN HASTALIKLARI & DOĞUM
dc.titleComparison of enhanced recovery protocol with conventional care in patients undergoing urogynecological surgery
dc.typeMakale
dc.relation.journalCESKA GYNEKOLOGIE-CZECH GYNAECOLOGY
dc.contributor.departmentKanuni Sultan Suleyman Training & Res Hosp , ,
dc.identifier.volume87
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.startpage232
dc.identifier.endpage238
dc.contributor.firstauthorID3454905


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster