4.4 Article

Patient-reported participation in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery cancer care: A pilot intervention study with patient-owned fast-track protocols

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE
卷 31, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ecc.13570

关键词

fast-track surgery; hepatopancreatobiliary cancer surgery; information; patient participation; recovery; surgical care

资金

  1. Medical Research Council of Southeast Sweden

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the impact of using patient-owned fast-track protocols on patient participation and information in hepatopancreatobiliary cancer surgery. The results suggest that the use of PFTP may lead to improvements for the patient group.
Objective Fast-track concepts have been implemented in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery cancer care to improve postoperative recovery. For optimal postoperative care, patient participation is also required. The aim was to investigate and analyse whether an intervention with patient-owned fast-track protocols (PFTPs) may lead to increased patient participation and improve information for patients who underwent surgery for hepatopancreatobiliary cancer. Methods A quantitative comparative design with a control and intervention group was used. The participants in the intervention group followed a PFTP during their admission. After discharge, the patients answered a questionnaire regarding patient participation. Data analyses were performed with descriptive statistics and ANCOVA. Results The results are based on a total of 222 completed questionnaires: 116 in the control group and 106 in the intervention group. It is uncertain whether the PFTP increased patient participation and information, but its use may indicate an improvement for the patient group. Conclusion A successful implementation strategy for the use of PFTP, with daily reconciliations, could be part of the work required to improve overall satisfaction with patient participation. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04061902

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据