ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2024
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guided gynecologic/oncology surgery - The patient's perspective.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Development and application of a quality evaluation scale for ERAS health education in gynecologic malignancies.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Association between nursing execution and postoperative recovery following laparoscopic benign gynecologic surgery: a prospective observational cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Application and research progress of the rapid rehabilitation concept in the perioperative gynaecological period.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have demonstrated improvements in outcomes following benign gynecologic and gynecologic oncology surgery. However, there is limited data reporting the benefit of ERAS from the patient's perspective. This study aimed to explore patient knowledge of and experience with ERAS-guided surgery. Methods: This interpretive descriptive study included participants who had undergone ERAS-guided gynecologic and gynecologic oncology surgery in Alberta, Canada using convenience sampling. Semi-structured interviews explored patient knowledge of ERAS, overall experience with surgery and recommended changes for surgical care. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted. Results: Eight females aged 26-76 years old participated in the study who had gynecologic (n = 4) and gynecologic oncology (n = 4) surgery. Six themes central to participant experience of ERAS-guided surgery were identified: patient expectations, individual motivation, values and support, healthcare provider communication, trust in healthcare providers, COVID-19 and care co-ordination. Overall, specific knowledge of ERAS was low. Expectations were set by previous experience of healthcare (previous surgery or occupation), as well as information provided by healthcare professionals. Participants whose expectations aligned with physical experience of ERAS provided favourable perspectives. Participants recommended improving the quality, relevance and availability of information and establishing accessible follow up strategies. Conclusion: Based on the finding that knowledge about ERAS was minimal, we advocate for improved education pertaining to ERAS recommendations. Acknowledging patients' expertise and motivation to engage in their care maybe one strategy to improve compliance with ERAS guidelines and improve outcomes for both patients and the healthcare system.
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.