View clinical trials related to Surgery--Complications.
Filter by:Patients who are scheduled for laparoscopic hysterectomy will be included in the study. After the operation, those who are well and without major distress will be discharged from the hospital before 24 hours. Those who have pain or have additional health problems will be observed further. Our aim is to compare these two groups in terms of early complications and operation characteristics.
To evaluate the feasibility of a pragmatic, large scale, comparative effectiveness, randomized evaluation of patient experience of intravenous propofol versus inhaled volatile anesthesia.
The aim of this prospective observational study is to identify the specific reasons that prolong a hospital stay after elective tumor craniotomy. Optimal postoperative in-hospital stay is considered to be two days from surgery to discharge from the neurosurgical ward. However, a variable length of stay at a neurological department for follow-up of late recognized deficits of neurological consequences of the surgical procedure are common.
In this retrospective cohort study, we assess the relationship between the intensity of early postoperative pain and the risk of infectious- and non-infectious complications within 30 days after major abdominal surgery.
The objectives of this study were the translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and assessment of the psychometric properties of the Turkish High-Activity Arthroplasty Score (HAAS) in patients with primary TKA.
In foot surgery, postoperative edema is a complication making the postoperative outcome quite uncertain as to the rehabilitation of the patient. The evolution of this edema is unknown ... The means of "mastering" this edema are empirical, with little study other than cryotherapy and restraint. This study aims to study postoperative edema in a cohort of patients undergoing forefoot surgery. The follow-up will be prospective with measurement of the volume of the foot using an optical technique, during the various follow-up consultations between Day 8 and Month 6 postoperative.
Neurosurgical practice has seen many important changes over several decades with advances in treatments and the types of patients treated. Neurosurgical procedures have evolved, and as outcomes have improved the number of patients being treated has increased. There are no recent evaluations of national neurosurgical practice in the United Kingdom (UK), with the last prospective cohort studies being Safe Neurosurgery 1993 and Safe Neurosurgery 2000. More recent studies of neurosurgical services have been based on data from single institutions or surgeons and these may not give a representative picture of practice nationally. Recent national quality improvement programmes for neurosurgery in England (such as the National Neurosurgical Audit Programme (NNAP) and Cranial Neurosurgery and Spinal Surgery Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) Programmes) have focused on using national hospital administrative datasets. To be effective, quality improvement initiatives require robust outcome measures and quality (process) indicators. Currently, there is a lack of validated quality indicators for neurosurgery, with practice often being described using generic measures such as readmission and reoperation rates and length of stay. Many studies have been able to derive these common outcome measures, but it may also be possible to produce indicators specific to neurosurgery. The aim of this observational study was firstly to describe the current pattern of neurosurgical admissions and procedures in England, and thereby given an overview of the epidemiology of neurosurgical patients. Secondly, it aims to investigate the range of outcome measures that might be produced from hospital administrative data and use these to assess the quality of care in neurosurgery.
Accurate and timely preoperative identification of high-risk patients provides opportunities to better inform and manage them. Current predictors for perioperative complications are either resource consuming or have low accuracy. The primary objective of the study is to assess if Wearable Devices may be an alternative to assess cardiopulmonary function, with low risks and lower costs.
Dry Eye Disease (DED) is a disease of the ocular surface which may be secondary to a variety of causes, including cataract surgery. DED is characterized by loss of tear film stability and dry eye symptoms, and its pathogenesis is related to corneal nerve injury, decreased goblet cells, inflammation of the ocular surface, and dysfunction of the meibomian glands (MGD). MGD is the main cause of evaporative DED and can cause irregularity of the ocular surface, affecting the accuracy of the biometric calculation. In addition, it is a risk factor for DED exacerbation after cataract surgery, that may occur in about 40% of cases. Current therapies for DED include artificial tears, warm compresses, manual squeezing of the glands, eyelid hygiene, omega-3 fatty acids, topical cyclosporine, serum tears, topical azithromycin, oral doxycycline. The above therapies in some cases can provide only transient relief, affecting the outcome of cataract surgery and the quality of life of patients. Therefore, stabilization of the ocular surface before cataract surgery is important to achieve better post-operative comfort and a better refractive result. The introduction of LipiFlow thermal pulsation treatment (LTP) represents a controlled method of squeezing the obstructed Meibomian glands by applying heat to the upper and lower eyelids and simultaneously applying pulsatile pressure to the eyelid skin surfaces. The aim of our study will be to evaluate the effect of preoperative LipiFlow therapy in patients with age-related cataracts and mild to moderate MGD in reducing postoperative DED.
Perioperative complications, especially intraoperative adverse events (iAEs), carry significant potential for long-term sequelae in a patient's postoperative course. Without consistent and homogenous reporting, these events represent a substantial gap in contemporary surgical literature and clinical practice. By definition, an iAE is any unplanned incident related to a surgical intervention occurring between skin incision and skin closure. Despite the availability of multiple intraoperative classification systems, the reporting of intraoperative adverse events remains exceedingly rare. Further, while most studies report postoperative adverse events, only a fraction of surgical publications report intraoperative complications as outcomes of interest. Many reasons could be related to this dearth in iAE reporting, ranging from a lack of clear iAE definitions to a fear of litigation. Broadly speaking, iAEs are negative outcomes, which, on the whole, epitomize a paradoxically well-documented bias in the literature. The investigators performed an umbrella review and meta-analysis of prior systematic reviews of complication reporting in a number of key urologic surgical domains. The investigators have since worked with academic surgeons to produce a set of iAE reporting guidelines known as the Intraoperative Complication Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Guidelines. These reporting criteria were developed using the reporting guidelines using the framework outlined by the EQUATOR Network (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research; www.equator-network.org/). As part of a prospective effort to evaluate the utility of these new guidelines, the investigators are performing a study of surgeons, anesthesiologists,s and nurses perceptions regarding iAE reporting and the global applicability of the new iAE reporting guidelines. In part one of this study, a series of survey questions will be used to better elucidate surgeon perceptions underlying the contemporary deficit in iAE reporting. In part two of this study, a set of assessments to representatives within various surgical specialties to assess the global applicability of the newly developed iAE reporting guidelines.