首页> 外文期刊>Indian journal of Anaesthesia >A prospective observational study comparing criteria-based discharge method with traditional time-based discharge method for discharging patients from post-anaesthesia care unit undergoing ambulatory or outpatient minor surgeries under general anaesthesia
【24h】

A prospective observational study comparing criteria-based discharge method with traditional time-based discharge method for discharging patients from post-anaesthesia care unit undergoing ambulatory or outpatient minor surgeries under general anaesthesia

机译:前瞻性观察性研究比较了基于标准的出院方法与传统的基于时间的出院方法对麻醉后从卧床或门诊进行小手术的麻醉后护理单位出院的患者

获取原文
           

摘要

Background and Aims: Mostly, institutions in India have single post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) which follows traditional time-based discharge (TBD) method. Recently, it has been classified into PACU Phase I and Phase II, and criteria-based discharge (CBD) method has been used. This study primarily compares CBD versus TBD methods in moving patients through PACU, and other non-clinical factors causing delay in shifting. Methods: One hundred patients, aged 18–65 years, American Society of Anesthesiologist's physical status I and II, scheduled for elective minor surgeries under general anaesthesia were studied. White's fast-track score in operating room (OR) and modified Aldrete's score (CBD time) in PACU were recorded. Patients were scheduled to discharge at 60 min based on TBD method. The mean CBD time and actual discharge time from PACU were statistically compared with TBD time. Other non-clinical factors delaying the discharge were also studied. Results: Eighty-five percent of patients achieved acceptable White's fast-track score in OR. The TBD time (60 min) was compared with the mean CBD time (10.70 ± 2.56 min) and actual discharge time (79.75 ± 12.98 min), which were found to be statistically significant. Primarily, anaesthesiologists' busy schedule was accountable for delay in discharge. Conclusion: The study concluded that in patients undergoing ambulatory minor surgeries, discharge times based on Criterion Based Discharge scoring systems such as modified Aldrete's and White's-fast are significantly lower in PACU Phase I as compared to the traditional Time Based Discharge method.
机译:背景与目的:在印度,大多数机构都采用单一的麻醉后护理单位(PACU),该单位遵循传统的基于时间的出院(TBD)方法。最近,已将其分为PACU阶段I和阶段II,并已使用基于标准的放电(CBD)方法。这项研究主要比较了在通过PACU的患者中使用CBD与TBD的方法,以及其他导致移位延迟的非临床因素。方法:研究了一百例年龄在18-65岁之间的美国麻醉医师协会I和II身体状况的患者,这些患者计划在全身麻醉下进行择期小手术。记录怀特在手术室(OR)中的快速得分和PACU中经修改的Aldrete得分(CBD时间)。根据TBD方法,患者计划在60分钟出院。将平均的CBD时间和从PACU排出的实际时间与TBD时间进行统计比较。还研究了延迟出院的其他非临床因素。结果:85%的患者在OR方面达到了可接受的White快速通道评分。将TBD时间(60分钟)与平均CBD时间(10.70±2.56分钟)和实际放电时间(79.75±12.98分钟)进行比较,发现它们具有统计学意义。首先,麻醉师的繁忙时间表是造成出院延迟的原因。结论:该研究得出结论,在进行门诊小手术的患者中,基于PATER I标准的基于标准出院评分系统的出院时间与传统的基于时间出院方法相比,显着降低了PACU I期的出院时间。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号