PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 8236549

[Ambulatory surgery and anesthesia. An inquiry study].

Abstract

Patients who had undergone surgical procedures as out-patients in either general or local anaesthesia were asked to complete a questionnaire with the aim of evaluating how they had experienced their operation, especially with respect to treatment and prevention of postoperative pain. Over a 12 month period, 851 patients (251 men and 600 women) who had undergone either abdominal, orthopaedic or gynaecological surgery as out-patients were given the questionnaire. Five hundred and fifteen patients (166 men and 349 women), i.e. 61%, answered. Nineteen percent had had their operation performed in local or regional anaesthesia, 30% in a combination of general anaesthesia with local infiltration, the remaining patients were operated under general anaesthesia. Eighty to ninety percent were satisfied with the preoperative information, and 88% were satisfied with the anaesthesia. Sixty-nine percent had had either no pain or almost no pain within the first 24 hours after the operation. Six percent found it difficult to stay home. Sixteen percent needed some kind of medical contact. Ninety-two percent said they would prefer out-patient surgery again as opposed to hospitalization, were they to need another operation. In conclusion, we found that these types of out-patient operations were acceptable to most of our patients (92%). We recommend widespread use of local anaesthetics in combination with general anaesthesia in order to minimize postoperative pain and facilitate the effect of postoperative analgetics.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M Weber, P Angermann, J Mikkelsen, P E Helkjaer, O Bjørn Andersen, T Nielsen. 1993-09-06. [Ambulatory surgery and anesthesia. An inquiry study].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8236549/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

The role of gait analysis in the orthopaedic management of ambulatory cerebral palsy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The literature was reviewed to describe the role of gait analysis in the orthopaedic management of ambulatory children with cerebral palsy and examine the current best evidence to support these roles. RECENT FINDINGS: Gait laboratory analysis is superior to visual or observational analysis of gait because it provides an objective record of gait that is able to quantify the magnitude of deviations of pathologic gait from normal and also explain these abnormalities. Recognizable gait patterns can be classified and used for making treatment decisions, the effectiveness of which can be assessed using gait analysis as a measure of gait outcomes. There are many sources of variability, however, including patients themselves, the gait laboratories and testing processes, interpretation of data and surgeons' surgical recommendations. SUMMARY: Although gait analysis has been shown to alter decision making, there is little evidence that the decisions based on gait analysis lead to better outcomes. Consequently, clinical gait analysis remains controversial, with wide variation in the rates of utilization of gait analysis in the management of children with ambulatory cerebral palsy. The time is ripe for clinical trials and cohort studies to provide the evidence to establish the appropriate utilization of this technology.

Ambulatory Surgical Procedures↗