Emergency Laparotomy Follow-Up Study (ELFUS): prospective feasibility investigation into postoperative complications and quality of life using patient-reported outcome measures up to a year after emergency laparotomy.
Complications
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS)
Quality of life; Emergency laparotomy
Journal
Perioperative medicine (London, England)
ISSN: 2047-0525
Titre abrégé: Perioper Med (Lond)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101609072
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Jul 2021
26 Jul 2021
Historique:
received:
19
06
2020
accepted:
26
04
2021
entrez:
26
7
2021
pubmed:
27
7
2021
medline:
27
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Emergency laparotomy carries a significant risk profile around the time of surgery. This research aimed to establish the feasibility of recruitment to a study using validated scoring tools to assess complications after surgery; and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess quality of life and quality of recovery up to a year following emergency laparotomy (EL). We used our local National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) register to identify potential participants at a single NHS centre in England. Complications were assessed at 5, 10 and 30 days after EL. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery using EQ5D and WHODAS 2.0 questionnaires. Seventy of 129 consecutive patients (54%) agreed to take part in the study. Post-operative morbidity survey data was recorded from 63 and 37 patients at postoperative day 5 and day 10. Accordion Complication Severity Grading data was obtained from 70 patients. Patient-reported outcome measures were obtained from patients at baseline and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery from 70, 59, 51, 48, to 42 patients (100%, 87%, 77%, 75% and 69% of survivors), respectively. This study affirms the feasibility of collecting PROMs and morbidity data successfully at various time points following emergency laparotomy, and is the first longitudinal study to describe quality of life up to a year after surgery. This finding is important in the design of a larger observational study into quality of life and recovery after EL.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Emergency laparotomy carries a significant risk profile around the time of surgery. This research aimed to establish the feasibility of recruitment to a study using validated scoring tools to assess complications after surgery; and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess quality of life and quality of recovery up to a year following emergency laparotomy (EL).
METHODS
METHODS
We used our local National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) register to identify potential participants at a single NHS centre in England. Complications were assessed at 5, 10 and 30 days after EL. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery using EQ5D and WHODAS 2.0 questionnaires.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Seventy of 129 consecutive patients (54%) agreed to take part in the study. Post-operative morbidity survey data was recorded from 63 and 37 patients at postoperative day 5 and day 10. Accordion Complication Severity Grading data was obtained from 70 patients. Patient-reported outcome measures were obtained from patients at baseline and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery from 70, 59, 51, 48, to 42 patients (100%, 87%, 77%, 75% and 69% of survivors), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This study affirms the feasibility of collecting PROMs and morbidity data successfully at various time points following emergency laparotomy, and is the first longitudinal study to describe quality of life up to a year after surgery. This finding is important in the design of a larger observational study into quality of life and recovery after EL.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34304730
doi: 10.1186/s13741-021-00193-5
pii: 10.1186/s13741-021-00193-5
pmc: PMC8311937
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
22Subventions
Organisme : Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland
ID : WKR0-2016-0054
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Ann Surg. 2005 Sep;242(3):326-41; discussion 341-3
pubmed: 16135919
Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2015 May 9;1:16
pubmed: 27965795
Ann Surg. 2009 Aug;250(2):177-86
pubmed: 19638919
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2018 Nov 15;2(1):54
pubmed: 30467820
Anaesthesia. 2017 Mar;72(3):309-316
pubmed: 27809332
BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2018 Oct 16;5(1):e000238
pubmed: 30397506
Anesthesiology. 2015 Mar;122(3):524-36
pubmed: 25689757
Br J Anaesth. 2018 Apr;120(4):705-711
pubmed: 29576111
Ann Surg. 2021 Apr 1;273(4):709-718
pubmed: 31188201
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2017 Jun;402(4):615-623
pubmed: 27502400
Anaesthesia. 2015 Sep;70(9):1020-7
pubmed: 25872411
Lancet. 2001 Nov 10;358(9293):1649
pubmed: 11716928
J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Mar;65(3):301-8
pubmed: 22169081
J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Sep;60(9):919-28
pubmed: 17689808
Br J Anaesth. 2012 Sep;109(3):368-75
pubmed: 22728205
Br J Surg. 1998 Sep;85(9):1217-20
pubmed: 9752863
World J Surg. 2016 Feb;40(2):267-76
pubmed: 26573174
N Engl J Med. 2014 Apr 10;370(15):1379-81
pubmed: 24716679