| Title |
Enhanced recovery after giant ventral hernia repair
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Hernia, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10029-016-1471-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
K. K. Jensen, T. L. Brondum, H. Harling, H. Kehlet, L. N. Jorgensen |
| Abstract |
Giant ventral hernia repair is associated with a high risk of postoperative morbidity and prolonged length of stay (LOS). Enhanced recovery (ERAS) measures have proved to lead to decreased morbidity and LOS after various surgical procedures, but never after giant hernia repair. The current study prospectively examined the results of implementation of an ERAS pathway including high-dose preoperative glucocorticoid, and compared the outcome with patients previously treated according to standard care (SC). Consecutive patients who underwent giant ventral hernia repair were included. Pain, nausea and fatigue were registered prospectively in all patients treated according to ERAS, as well as continuous measurement of transcutaneous capillary oxygen saturation. Postoperative morbidity and LOS were compared between patients treated according to ERAS and a historic group treated with SC. A total of 32 patients were included. Postoperative LOS was decreased after the introduction of the ERAS pathway compared with SC (median 3.0 vs. 5.5 days, P = 0.003). Scores of pain, nausea and fatigue were low, while mean oxygen saturation during the first three postoperative days was 0.92. There were no differences when comparing readmission (5 vs. 2, P = 0.394), postoperative complications (7 vs. 4, P = 0. 458), or reoperation (5 vs. 1, P = 0.172) in ERAS versus controls. The current study suggests that an ERAS pathway including preoperative high-dose glucocorticoid may lead to low scores of pain, fatigue and nausea after giant ventral hernia repair with reduced LOS compared with patients treated according to SC. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Iceland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 14 | 20% |
| Unknown | 20 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 49% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Psychology | 1 | 1% |
| Engineering | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 29 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,310,230
of 22,851,489 outputs
Outputs from Hernia
#636
of 1,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,124
of 298,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Hernia
#14
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,851,489 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,110 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 298,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.