We have located links that may give you full text access.
Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols in functional endoscopic sinus surgery for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a randomized clinical trial.
Chinese Medical Journal 2019 Februrary 6
BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are a series of perioperative care to optimize preoperative preparation, prevent postoperative complications, minimize stress, and speed up recovery. This study aimed to assess the impact of ERAS protocols for functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP).
METHODS: One hundred and two patients with CRSwNP undergoing FESS were randomly divided into the ERAS group and the control group. The outcomes of the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) and Kolcaba Comfort Scale Questionnaire (GCQ) were determined in both groups. The serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) were compared preoperatively and 24 hours postoperatively.
RESULTS: The ERAS group had a significantly better SAS scores than did the control group (28 [24, 35] vs. 43 [42, 47], Z = 5.968, P < 0.001). The rhinalgia and headache scores at 2, 24 and 48 hours postoperatively were lower in the ERAS group than that in the control group (all P < 0.001). The outcomes of the MOS-SS (43 [42, 39] vs. 28 [22, 35], Z = 7.071, P < 0.001) and GCQ (76 [68, 87] vs. 64 [50, 75], Z = 4.806, P < 0.001) were significantly different between the two groups. No significant difference was found in the preoperative CRP levels between the two groups (1.3 [0.6, 2.8] vs. 0.5 [0.5, 1.2], Z = 3.049, P > 0.05); However, the CRP level in 24 hours postoperatively was significantly lower in the ERAS group than that in the control group (2.5 [1.4, 3.9] vs. 6.6 [3.8, 9.0], Z = 5.027, P < 0.001). The incidence rates of complications, such as nausea/emesis (χ = 0.343, P > 0.05), hemorrhage, aspiration and tumble, were not increased in the ERAS group compared with those in the control group. The ERAS group had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay (5 [4, 5] days vs. 8 [8,9] days, Z = 8.939, P < 0.001) and hospitalization expenses ($ 2670 [2375, 2740] vs. $3129 [3116, 3456], Z = 8.514, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: ERAS protocols might optimize FESS for patients with CRSwNP by reducing psychological and physical stress, shortening the length of hospital stay and lowering hospitalization expenses without increasing postoperative complications.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, No. ChiCTR1800015791; https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=26872.
METHODS: One hundred and two patients with CRSwNP undergoing FESS were randomly divided into the ERAS group and the control group. The outcomes of the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) and Kolcaba Comfort Scale Questionnaire (GCQ) were determined in both groups. The serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) were compared preoperatively and 24 hours postoperatively.
RESULTS: The ERAS group had a significantly better SAS scores than did the control group (28 [24, 35] vs. 43 [42, 47], Z = 5.968, P < 0.001). The rhinalgia and headache scores at 2, 24 and 48 hours postoperatively were lower in the ERAS group than that in the control group (all P < 0.001). The outcomes of the MOS-SS (43 [42, 39] vs. 28 [22, 35], Z = 7.071, P < 0.001) and GCQ (76 [68, 87] vs. 64 [50, 75], Z = 4.806, P < 0.001) were significantly different between the two groups. No significant difference was found in the preoperative CRP levels between the two groups (1.3 [0.6, 2.8] vs. 0.5 [0.5, 1.2], Z = 3.049, P > 0.05); However, the CRP level in 24 hours postoperatively was significantly lower in the ERAS group than that in the control group (2.5 [1.4, 3.9] vs. 6.6 [3.8, 9.0], Z = 5.027, P < 0.001). The incidence rates of complications, such as nausea/emesis (χ = 0.343, P > 0.05), hemorrhage, aspiration and tumble, were not increased in the ERAS group compared with those in the control group. The ERAS group had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay (5 [4, 5] days vs. 8 [8,9] days, Z = 8.939, P < 0.001) and hospitalization expenses ($ 2670 [2375, 2740] vs. $3129 [3116, 3456], Z = 8.514, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: ERAS protocols might optimize FESS for patients with CRSwNP by reducing psychological and physical stress, shortening the length of hospital stay and lowering hospitalization expenses without increasing postoperative complications.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, No. ChiCTR1800015791; https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=26872.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app