Ambulatory and admitted laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients have comparable outcomes but different functional health status
dc.contributor.author | Jones, Katherine R. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Burney, Richard E. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2006-09-08T20:19:50Z | |
dc.date.available | 2006-09-08T20:19:50Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2002-06 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Burney, R.E.; Jones, K.R.; (2002). "Ambulatory and admitted laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients have comparable outcomes but different functional health status ." Surgical Endoscopy 16(6): 921-926. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/42429> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0930-2794 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/42429 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=12163955&dopt=citation | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is frequently an ambulatory procedure, but some patients are best admitted for a brief hospital stay. In this study, we compared the functional health status, symptoms, and outcomes of patients undergoing ambulatory elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy to those with brief hospital admission. The purpose was to assess patient satisfaction and to identify factors that might assist in selecting patients for ambulatory vs short-stay operations. Methods: A total of 140 patients scheduled for elective cholecystectomy completed the SF-36 health survey and provided additional information regarding symptoms preoperatively, at 2 months, and at 6 months after operation. Results: All patients had symptomatic gallstones; 76 were admitted to the hospital, and 64 were ambulatory. Admitted patients reported more emotional role limitations on preoperative SF-36. They also reported symptoms of depression more often. Patients in both groups were equally relieved of symptoms of pain, nausea, vomiting, and tenderness. Satisfaction with care was similar for both groups; however, at 2 and 6 months, admitted patients continued to report significantly poorer functional health status than ambulatory patients. Conclusion: A reliable, reproducible measure of functional health status, such as the SF-36, may be useful for identifying patients who are appropriate for short-stay hospital admission after laparoscopic cholecystectomy as part of a decision process that tries to optimize outcomes while utilizing resources efficiently. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 191149 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 3115 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.language.iso | en_US | |
dc.publisher | Springer-Verlag; Springer-Verlag New York Inc. | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Legacy | en_US |
dc.title | Ambulatory and admitted laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients have comparable outcomes but different functional health status | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Surgery and Anesthesiology | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Nursing | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, TC2922 University Hospital, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0331, USA, US, | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | School of Nursing, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, 4200 East Ninth Avenue, Denver, CO 80262, USA, US, | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampus | Ann Arbor | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 12163955 | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/42429/1/464-16-6-921_s00464-001-8201-z.pdf | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-8201-z | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Surgical Endoscopy | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.