ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2026
A randomized evaluation of early oral feeding after ambulatory non-gastrointestinal surgical patients under general anesthesia.
Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal timing and safety of early oral feeding after non-gastrointestinal surgery under general anesthesia remain unclear, particularly in ambulatory settings. This study aims to evaluate the impact of an evidence-based early oral feeding strategy on postoperative adverse events, patient comfort, and gastrointestinal recovery in patients undergoing day case non-gastrointestinal surgery.
methodsA total of 117 patients were allocated to an intervention group (n = 62) receiving an early oral feeding protocol based on Steward Recovery Score and Apfel PONV risk assessment, or a control group (n = 55) following a conventional 2-4-6 h fasting protocol. Outcomes included time to first oral intake, incidence of nausea, vomiting, choking, abdominal distension, thirst and hunger VAS scores, pain NRS scores, postoperative infusion volume, and time to first flatus.
resultsThe intervention group had significantly earlier first drink and meal times (P < 0.001). The incidences of nausea and vomiting at 2 h were reduced to 12.90% and 6.45%, significantly lower than the control group (29.09% and 16.36%, P < 0.05). Multivariable logistic regression identified early feeding as an independent protective factor, associated with a 63.9% reduction in the odds of nausea (AOR = 0.361) and a 79.7% reduction in the odds of choking (AOR = 0.203) at 2 h postoperatively. Thirst, hunger, pain scores, alongside postoperative infusion volume were all significantly lower in the intervention group (all P < 0.001). Time to first flatus was markedly shortened in the intervention group (P < 0.001).
conclusionIn patients undergoing ambulatory non-gastrointestinal procedures with comparable discharge criteria, the early feeding protocol produced clinically meaningful improvements in patient-centered outcomes: early postoperative comfort was significantly enhanced through substantial reductions in thirst and hunger VAS scores, while the odds of early PONV were reduced. These findings support implementing this protocol in similar ambulatory surgical settings to improve recovery quality.
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.