IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0243096.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enhanced recovery programmes versus conventional care in bariatric surgery: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Khalid Al-Rubeaan
  • Cindy Tong
  • Hannah Taylor
  • Karl Miller
  • Thao Nguyen Phan Thanh
  • Christian Ridley
  • Sara Steeves
  • William Marsh

Abstract

Background: With obesity prevalence projected to increase, the demand for bariatric surgery will consequently rise. Enhanced recovery programmes aim for improved recovery, earlier discharge, and more efficient use of resources following surgery. This systematic literature review aimed to evaluate the evidence available on the effects of enhanced recovery programmes after three common bariatric procedures: laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database were searched for studies published in 2012–2019 comparing outcomes with enhanced recovery programmes versus conventional care after bariatric surgery in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Data were extracted and meta-analyses or descriptive analyses performed when appropriate using R. Results: Of 1152 screened articles, seven relevant studies including 3592 patients were identified. Six reported outcomes for 1434 patients undergoing LRYGB; however, as only individual studies reported on LSG and OAGB these could not be included in the analyses. The meta-analysis revealed a significantly shorter mean duration of hospital-stay for LRYGB enhanced recovery programmes than conventional care (mean difference [95% CI]: -1.34 days [-2.01, -0.67]; p

Suggested Citation

  • Khalid Al-Rubeaan & Cindy Tong & Hannah Taylor & Karl Miller & Thao Nguyen Phan Thanh & Christian Ridley & Sara Steeves & William Marsh, 2020. "Enhanced recovery programmes versus conventional care in bariatric surgery: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-15, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0243096
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243096
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0243096
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0243096&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0243096?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0243096. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.