| Title |
Enhanced Recovery after Bariatric Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Obesity Surgery, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11695-016-2438-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Piotr Małczak, Magdalena Pisarska, Major Piotr, Michał Wysocki, Andrzej Budzyński, Michał Pędziwiatr |
| Abstract |
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol is well established in many surgical disciplines and leads to a decrease in the length of hospital stay and morbidity. Multimodal protocols have also been introduced to bariatric surgery. This review aims to evaluate the current literature on ERAS in obesity surgery and to conduct a meta-analysis of primary and secondary outcomes. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies. Key journals were hand-searched. We analysed data up to May 2016. Eligible studies had to contain four described ERAS protocol elements. The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay; the secondary outcomes included overall morbidity, specific complications, mortality, readmissions and costs. Random effect meta-analyses were undertaken. The initial search yielded 1151 articles. Thorough evaluation resulted in 11 papers, which were analysed. The meta-analysis of the length of stay presented a significant reduction standard mean difference (Std. MD) = -2.39 (-3.89, -0.89), p = 0.002. The analysis of overall morbidity, specific complications and Clavien-Dindo classification showed no significant variations among the study groups. ERAS protocol in bariatric surgery leads to the reduction of the length of hospital stay while maintaining no or low influence on morbidity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 20% |
| Spain | 2 | 20% |
| Canada | 2 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 50% |
| Scientists | 3 | 30% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 219 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 10% |
| Other | 19 | 9% |
| Researcher | 18 | 8% |
| Other | 55 | 25% |
| Unknown | 59 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 109 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 7% |
| Psychology | 5 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 1% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 17 | 8% |
| Unknown | 66 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 November 2023.
All research outputs
#3,007,298
of 24,769,082 outputs
Outputs from Obesity Surgery
#338
of 3,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,496
of 318,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obesity Surgery
#6
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,769,082 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,639 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,225 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.