Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9554895›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1998

Medical and psychosocial effects of early discharge after surgery for breast cancer: randomised trial.

J Bonnema, A M van Wersch, A N van Geel, J F Pruyn, P I Schmitz, M A Paul, T Wiggers

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03555227 (Ultrasound Guided), which is not on this map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03555227 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Ultrasound Guided (USG) PECS Versus Local Infiltration Anaesthesia (LIA) for Breast Cancer Surgery - A Randomized Quadruple Blinded Efficacy and Safety Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Health Service, United KingdomRan2017 to 2018Enrolled110ConditionsBreast Cancer FemaleArmsUSG PECS2 with Drug A (active), USG PECS2 with Drug P (placebo), Wound infiltration with Drug P (placebo), Wound infiltration with Drug A (active)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Patients' perspective on day case breast surgery.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2015
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Postoperative education concerning the use of the upper limb, and exercise and treatment of the upper limb: cross-sectional survey of 105 breast cancer patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2004
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

J BonnemaDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Hospital Rotterdam/Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center, Zuider Hospital Rotterdam, PO Box 5201, 3008 AE Rotterdam, Netherlands. wiggers@chih.azr.nl
A M van Wersch
A N van Geel
J F Pruyn
P I Schmitz
M A Paul
T Wiggers
Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences · NLStornoway Historical Society · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the medical and psychosocial effects of early hospital discharge after surgery for breast cancer on complication rate, patient satisfaction, and psychosocial outcomes.

designRandomised trial comparing discharge from hospital 4 days after surgery (with drain in situ) with discharge after drain removal (mean 9 days in hospital). Psychosocial measurements performed before surgery and 1 and 4 months after.

settingGeneral hospital and cancer clinic in Rotterdam with a socioeconomically diverse population. SUBJECTS: 125 women with operable breast cancer.

main outcome measuresIncidence of complications after surgery for breast cancer, patient satisfaction with treatment, and psychosocial effects of short stay or long stay in hospital.

resultsPatient satisfaction with the short stay in hospital was high; only 4% (2/56 at 1 month after surgery and 2/52 at 4 months after surgery) of patients indicated that they would have preferred a longer stay. There were no significant differences in duration of drainage from the axilla between the short stay and long stay groups (median 8 v 9 days respectively, P=0.45) or the incidence of wound complications (10 patients v 9 patients). The median number of seroma aspirations per patient was higher for the long stay group (1 v 3.5, P=0.04). Leakage along the drain occurred more frequently in short stay patients (21 v 10 patients, P=0.04). The two groups did not differ in scores for psychosocial problems (uncertainty, anxiety, loneliness, disturbed sleep, loss of control, threat to self esteem), physical or psychological complaints, or in the coping strategies used. Before surgery, short stay patients scored higher on scales of depression (P=0.03) and after surgery they were more likely to discuss their disease with their families (at 1 month P=0.004, at 4 months P=0.04).

conclusionsEarly discharge from hospital after surgery for breast cancer is safe and is well received by patients. Early discharge seems to enhance the opportunity for social support within the family.

Indexed as

Length of StayPatient DischargePatient SatisfactionPsychology, SocialBreast NeoplasmsCancer Care FacilitiesFemaleHospitals, GeneralHumansNetherlandsPostoperative CarePostoperative Complications

Identifiers

PMID9554895
PMCPMC28526
OpenAlexW1964409578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.