• Cir Cir · Jan 2018

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study

    [Seguridad y eficacia del modelo de atención fast-track vs. atención convencional en apendicitis no complicada del paciente pediátrico].

    • Alberto Tlacuilo-Parra, Sandy P López-Valenzuela, Gabriela Ambriz-González, and Elizabeth Guevara-Gutiérrez.
    • División de Investigación en Salud, Unidad Médica de Alta Especialidad (UMAE) Hospital de Pediatría, Centro Médico Nacional de Occidente, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social (IMSS).
    • Cir Cir. 2018 Jan 1; 86 (5): 412-416.

    ObjetivoComparar la seguridad y la eficacia de la atención fast-track vs. atención convencional en apendicitis no complicada en un hospital pediátrico.MétodoEnsayo clínico controlado, aleatorizado, con dos grupos de 30 pacientes cada uno: A) fast-track, apendicitis no complicada que cumplieron el programa; y B) atención convencional, apendicitis no complicada con atención habitual. Variables de seguridad y eficacia: proporción de complicaciones y tiempo de estancia hospitalaria.ResultadosSe incluyeron 60 pacientes, sin diferencia entre grupos: sexo masculino (53 vs. 60%), edad (8 ± 3 vs. 8 ± 2 años), tiempo de evolución (23 ± 21 vs. 24 ± 20 horas), tiempo desde ingreso a urgencias hasta inicio de cirugía (6 ± 4 vs. 8 ± 6 horas), y tipo de apendicitis edematosa (27 vs. 24%) o supurada (73 vs. 76%). La estancia hospitalaria promedio del grupo fast-track fue de 13 ± 5 vs. 72 ± 40 horas del grupo de atención convencional (p = 0.001). Hubo complicaciones en el 3 y el 6%, respectivamente (p = 1.0). La estancia hospitalaria disminuyó 2.45 días por paciente con el protocolo fast-track, lo que representa un ahorro de $ 6,731 pesos/día/paciente/hospitalización (US$ 373), sin un aumento de las complicaciones.ConclusiónEl protocolo fast-track en los niños con apendicitis no complicada es seguro y efectivo en un hospital universitario. El programa fast-track aportó beneficios clínicos y económicos, ahorrando en total $ 403,860 en los 30 pacientes.ObjectiveTo compare safety and efficacy of fast-track program vs. conventional attention in non-complicated appendicitis attending a pediatric university hospital.MethodRandomized clinical trial, comparing two groups with 30 patients each: (A) fast-track group, appendicitis agreeing the treatment protocol; and (B) conventional attention group, appendicitis following habitual surgical care. The efficacy and safety measures were length of hospital stay and proportion of complications.ResultsWe included 60 patients, there were no significant difference between groups with regard: male gender (53 vs. 60%), age (8 ± 3 vs. 8 ± 2 years-old), time of evolution (23 ± 21 vs. 24 ± 20 h), time since admittance to emergency and beginning of surgery (6 ± 4 vs. 8 ± 6 h), and type of appendicitis edematous (27 vs. 24%) or suppurate (73 vs. 76%). Mean length of hospital stay in fast-track group was 13 ± 5 vs. 72 ± 40 h in conventional attention (p = 0.001). The complications were 3 and 6%, respectively (p = 1.0). Fast-track program diminished length of hospital stay in 2.45 days per patient, representing a mean cost saving of 6,731 Mexican pesos per day, per patient hospitalized (US$ 373), without increased complications.ConclusionFast-track program in children with non-complicated appendicitis is safe and effective in pediatric university hospital; there was cost-minimization without carelessness of safety. This program support clinical and economic benefits, a total saving of 403,860 Mexican pesos for the 30 patients in the fast-track group.Copyright: © 2018 Permanyer.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.