| Title |
‘Am I really ready to go home?’: a qualitative study of patients’ experience of early discharge following an enhanced recovery programme for liver resection surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-016-3158-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
T. Vandrevala, V. Senior, L. Spring, L. Kelliher, C. Jones |
| Abstract |
Fast-track surgery or enhanced recovery programmes (ERP) have been shown to improve patient outcomes with shorter post-operative recovery times, fewer complications and more cost-effective care amongst the reported benefits. Traditionally, the effectiveness of ERPs have been assessed by measuring clinical outcomes, with the patient experience often being neglected. The aim of this qualitative study was to ascertain patients' expectations and experiences of fast-track surgery and recovery at home within the setting of an enhanced recovery programme (ERP). Twenty patients enrolled in the treatment group of the randomised controlled trial 'Enhanced recovery in liver resection surgery' were interviewed pre-operatively and 6 weeks post-surgery. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Patients approached the surgery with a sense of renewed hope. Involvement with the ERP was viewed positively, and having milestones to aim for gave patients a sense of purpose. Many felt that real recovery from surgery began at home and so felt positive about having an early discharge. Patients did report some concerns about being discharged early and those who failed to meet milestones or were readmitted to hospital experienced this as failure. This qualitative data demonstrates some of the complexities of patients' expectations and experiences of the ERP. Whilst patients generally experience the ERP positively, they also have concerns about the process. The study highlights areas where additional support may be needed for patients enrolled in ERPs and discharged early. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 14% |
| Researcher | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 9 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 25% |
| Psychology | 4 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 11 | 22% |
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 22 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,842,329
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#2,940
of 4,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,534
of 299,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#57
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,588 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 299,781 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 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.