-
Observational Study
Assessment of intermediate phase post anesthesia quality of recovery and its affecting factors.
- Zekarias Markos, Hunde Amsalu, Addisu Mekuanint, Samson Yirga, Atsedu Endale Simegn, and Ayenew Kassegn.
- Department of Anesthesia, Wachamo University, Medicine and Health Science College, Hossana, Ethiopia. zekibegeta@gmail.com.
- BMC Anesthesiol. 2024 Sep 28; 24 (1): 342342.
BackgroundRecovery after surgery and anesthesia is dependent on patient, surgical, and anesthetic characteristics, as well as the presence of any of numerous adverse sequelae. Postoperative recovery is a complex and multidimensional process that requires a holistic view of the recovery of capacities and homeostasis after anesthesia and surgery.ObjectiveTo assess the quality of recovery after anesthesia and its affecting factors at Wachamo University Nigist Eleni Mohamed Memorial Comprehensive Hospital.Methoda prospective observational study was conducted at Wachamo University Nigist Eleni Mohamed Memorial Comprehensive Hospital among 384 surgical patients who undergone under anesthesia. Quality of recovery was assessed by using Quality of Recovery 40. Student t-test and one-way ANOVA were utilized to compare the mean of Quality of recovery in different groups. Binary regression was used to find out the factors affecting Quality of recovery quality of recovery. SPSS 27 was used for analysis. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultSex and smoking history were the factors that we failed to find an association with poor quality of recovery. Preoperative antiemetic administration; premedication with benzodiazepines and emergency procedures were the factors that show potential relation with poor quality of recovery after anesthesia and surgery. Procedures performed under general anesthesia; Patients who had coexisting diseases; post-anesthesia incidence of nausea and vomiting; Visual Analog Scale score >/= 7 during discharge and prolonged duration of surgery were the factors that had a significant association with poor quality of recovery.ConclusionThe magnitude of good quality of recovery was 65.6% whereas 34.4% scored poor quality of recovery. The predictors for the prevalence of poor quality of recovery were found to be orthopedic procedures; procedures undergone under general anesthesia; incidence of post-anesthesia nausea and vomiting; prolonged length of the procedure and severity of pain.© 2024. The Author(s).
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?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.
.