A protocol-based fluid optimization programme using intraoperative oesophageal Doppler monitoring leads to a shorter hospital stay and decreased morbidity in patients undergoing elective colorectal resection.
We found that pre-operative administration of oral carbohydrate leads to a significantly reduced postoperative hospital stay, and a trend towards earlier return of gut function when compared with fasting or supplementary water.
This is a repository copy of Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH) : a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial. Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH) : a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial. The Lancet. ISSN 0140-6736 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32521-2 eprints@whiterose.ac.uk https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/
ReuseThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can't change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/
Implications of all the available evidenceDespite the success of some smaller projects, there was no survival benefit from a national quality improvement programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. To succeed, large national quality improvement programmes need to allow for differences between hospitals and ensure teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care.
Intraoperative equipment costs are greater for laparoscopic resection than for open surgery. However, benefits can be seen in terms of quicker recovery and shorter hospital stay. Laparoscopic surgery is a financially viable alternative to open resection in selected patients.
Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of Direct access colonoscopy (DAC) vs outpatient appointments for two-week rule colorectal cancer referrals and to evaluate the satisfaction of patients referred through these routes. Patients and methods Data were collected prospectively from January 2003 to December 2003 on patients who were referred for DAC or outpatient appointments at the discretion of the referring General practitioner via the Lower GI two-week rule pathway. A postal questionnaire was used to survey patient satisfaction. Results Six hundred and thirty-nine patients were referred via the two-week rule pathway; 188 patients underwent colonoscopy at their initial hospital visit and 19 (10.1%) colorectal cancers were diagnosed; 442 patients had an outpatient appointment and 32 (7.2%) colorectal cancers were identified. There were 7 (1%) inappropriate referrals and 2 patients refused investigations. All outcome parameters measured were reduced for patients referred directly for colonoscopy including time to definitive investigations (Median 9 vs 52 days P < 0.0001), time to histological diagnosis (Median 14 vs 42 days P < 0.0001) and time to treatment (Median 55 vs 75 days P < 0.0483). One hundred and seventy patients were surveyed by the postal questionnaire of whom 127 (75%) responded. Ninety-eight percent of patients were satisfied with the service provided. Four (6.6%) of 60 patients who had undergone direct access colonoscopy expressed a desire to be seen at the outpatient department initially. Conclusions Direct access colonoscopy results in significantly reduced times to histological diagnosis and definitive treatment in patients with colorectal cancer. Patients can be directly admitted for investigations bypassing the outpatient clinic without affecting patient satisfaction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.