ArticleCureus2021
Evaluate the Effectiveness of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Versus Conventional Approach in Benign Gynecological Surgeries: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Enhanced recovery after surgery versus conventional postoperative care in patients undergoing hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of enhanced recovery pathways on patient-reported outcomes after abdominal surgery: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Post-surgical diets in the ERAS protocol: D-ERAS scoping review.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2026Article
- Cognitive behavioral therapy targeting persecutory delusions in chronic outpatients with schizophrenia: a randomized controlled trial on functional recovery and symptom severity.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) for non-malignant gynaecological conditions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) model versus conventional approach in benign gynecological surgeries (incorporating various routes of surgery). Methods This was a randomized controlled trial wherein patients undergoing gynecological surgery for benign indications from January 2019 to July 2020 were recruited and randomized into ERAS and conventional protocol groups using block randomization. The intended primary outcome was to compare the median length of hospital stay in both groups. "Fit for discharge" criteria were used to assess the length of stay as patients who belonged to hilly terrain with limited transportation facilities stayed for a longer duration. Results A total of 180 patients were recruited and 90 each was randomized into ERAS and conventional protocol groups. The difference in length of hospital stay between ERAS (36 hours, range 24-96 hours) and conventional group (72 hours, range: 24-144 hours) was significant (p<0.01). A statistically significant difference was noted in the time for recovery of bowel function and tolerance for diet in the ERAS group. No significant difference in complications and readmission (within 30 days) rate was seen between the two groups. Quality of life as assessed by the World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief Version (WHO-QOL BREF) on the day of discharge and day 30 was higher in the ERAS group in physical and psychological domains, while no difference was seen in environmental and social domains. Conclusion This study as an institutional experience strengthens the existing evidence regarding the efficacy of ERAS in reducing hospital stay and improving quality of life compared to the conventional perioperative management protocol.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.