Trial reportBMC surgery2024
Enhancing patient outcomes through nursing care in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration; a randomized control trail.
Trial report in BMC surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundWhen compared to open surgery, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is known to cause less discomfort and a faster recovery. This study examines the effect of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) strategy on LCBDE outcomes.
methodsIn March 2021 to May 2024, 400 patients with LCBDE participated in randomized research. The six patient groups were: Multimodal Pain Management (n = 50), Standard Pain Management (n = 50), ERAS (n = 50), Preoperative Assessment (n = 100), Standard Preoperative Assessment (n = 100), and Standard Care (n = 50). The patient's satisfaction, long-term recovery, pain, anxiety, and complication rates were among the outcomes that were measured.
resultsAfter the intervention, the mean anxiety level of the ERAS group was significantly lower (P < 0.05), and their rates of complications were also decreased. Reduced postoperative pain scores, which were 5 on day 1 and decreased to 3 by day 3, were the consequence of the multimodal pain management strategy inside ERAS. A 90% satisfaction rating and an average recovery period of five days were reported by the ERAS group. Long-term results in ERAS showed that the average time to return to work was only 25 days, and there was a decreased incidence of chronic pain.
conclusionThe ERAS protocol enhances the short- and long-term course of recovery for patients with LCBDE, leading to increased satisfaction and better clinical outcomes. These results suggest that the ERAS method should be used as the gold standard for postoperative care for patients with LCBDE.
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.