Journal
CURRENT OPINION IN ANESTHESIOLOGY
Volume 31, Issue 4, Pages 396-401Publisher
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000612
Keywords
anesthesia; complications; outcome; quality of recovery score; surgery
Categories
Funding
- Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Practitioner Fellowship [1135937]
- National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [1135937] Funding Source: NHMRC
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Purpose of reviewPerioperative studies increasingly report patient-centered outcomes, but few provide a valid, global measure of a patient's health status after surgery and anesthesia. This review considers three quality of recovery (QoR) scales.Recent findingsThe 9-item (QoR Score), 15-item (QoR-15), and 40-item (QoR-40) QoR scales have been extensively validated in perioperative settings, and have also been used as outcome measures in numerous surgery and anesthesia studies. A range of clinical trials are presented to illustrate the value of the QoR scales in perioperative medicine research.SummaryThe QoR Score, QoR-15, and QoR-40 are valid and recommended endpoints for perioperative clinical trials, and there is guidance as to what constitutes a minimal clinically important difference. These recovery scales are sensitive to a change in health status and, as numerical data, optimize statistical power when used in the design of a clinical trial. They are closely correlated with conventional measures of outcome such as analgesic consumption, pain scores, nausea and vomiting, and hospital stay. Although conventional measures may be considered patient-centered, each are incomplete by themselves. QoR scores provide a meaningful overall evaluation of a patient's recovery after surgery and anesthesia.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available