scholarly journals Utility of Routine Preoperative Laboratory Testing for Low-Risk Patients in Ambulatory Gynecologic Surgery

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (7) ◽  
pp. S46-S47
Author(s):  
O. Mutter ◽  
G.A. Taylor ◽  
E. Grebenyuk ◽  
L.E. Kuo ◽  
K. Sanserino
Author(s):  
Olga Mutter ◽  
George A. Taylor ◽  
Ekaterina Grebenyuk ◽  
Lindsay E. Kuo ◽  
Kathryne A. Sanserino

1999 ◽  
Vol 91 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet D. Pavlin ◽  
Edward G. Pavlin ◽  
Dermot R. Fitzgibbon ◽  
Meagan E. Koerschgen ◽  
Terryn M. Plitt

Background This study was designed to test a treatment algorithm for management of bladder function after outpatient general or local anesthesia. Methods Three hundred twenty-four outpatients, stratified into risk categories for urinary retention, were studied. Patients in category 1 were low-risk patients (n = 227) having non-pelvic surgery and randomly assigned to receive 10 ml/kg or 2 ml/kg of intravenous fluid intraoperatively. They were discharged when otherwise ready, without being required to void. Patients in category 2 (n = 40), also presumed to be low risk, had gynecologic surgery. High-risk patients included 31 patients having hernia or anal surgery (category 3), and 31 patients with a history of retention (category 4). Bladder volumes were monitored by ultrasound in those in categories 2-4, and patients were required to void (or be catheterized) before discharge. The incidence of retention and urinary tract symptoms after surgery were determined for all categories. Result Urinary retention affected 0.5% of category 1 patients and none of category 2 patients. Median time to void after discharge was 75 min (interquartile range 120) in category 1 patients (n = 27) discharged without voiding. Fluids administered did not alter incidence of retention or time to void. Retention occurred in 5% of high-risk patients before discharge and recurred in 25% after discharge. Conclusion In reliable patients at low risk for retention, voiding before discharge appears unnecessary. In high-risk patients, continued observation until the bladder is emptied is indicated to avoid prolonged overdistention of the bladder.


2022 ◽  
Vol 270 ◽  
pp. 421-429
Author(s):  
Sarah M. Kling ◽  
George A. Taylor ◽  
Matthew M. Philp ◽  
Juan Lucas Poggio ◽  
Howard M. Ross ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 1944-1955 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Schwarz ◽  
Elizabeth C. Ward ◽  
Petrea Cornwell ◽  
Anne Coccetti ◽  
Pamela D'Netto ◽  
...  

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine (a) the agreement between allied health assistants (AHAs) and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) when completing dysphagia screening for low-risk referrals and at-risk patients under a delegation model and (b) the operational impact of this delegation model. Method All AHAs worked in the adult acute inpatient settings across three hospitals and completed training and competency evaluation prior to conducting independent screening. Screening (pass/fail) was based on results from pre-screening exclusionary questions in combination with a water swallow test and the Eating Assessment Tool. To examine the agreement of AHAs' decision making with SLPs, AHAs ( n = 7) and SLPs ( n = 8) conducted an independent, simultaneous dysphagia screening on 51 adult inpatients classified as low-risk/at-risk referrals. To examine operational impact, AHAs independently completed screening on 48 low-risk/at-risk patients, with subsequent clinical swallow evaluation conducted by an SLP with patients who failed screening. Results Exact agreement between AHAs and SLPs on overall pass/fail screening criteria for the first 51 patients was 100%. Exact agreement for the two tools was 100% for the Eating Assessment Tool and 96% for the water swallow test. In the operational impact phase ( n = 48), 58% of patients failed AHA screening, with only 10% false positives on subjective SLP assessment and nil identified false negatives. Conclusion AHAs demonstrated the ability to reliably conduct dysphagia screening on a cohort of low-risk patients, with a low rate of false negatives. Data support high level of agreement and positive operational impact of using trained AHAs to perform dysphagia screening in low-risk patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document