-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Patient and physician perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic appendectomy
Tomas Hucl, Adela Saglova, Marek Benes, Matej Kocik, Martin Oliverius, Zdenek Valenta, Julius Spicak
Jazyk angličtina Země Tchaj-wan
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
Grantová podpora
NT11236
MZ0
CEP - Centrální evidence projektů
Digitální knihovna NLK
Plný text - Článek
Zdroj
NLK
Free Medical Journals
od 1998
Freely Accessible Science Journals
od 1998
PubMed Central
od 1997
Europe PubMed Central
od 1997
PubMed
22553405
DOI
10.3748/wjg.v18.i15.1800
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- MeSH
- apendektomie metody MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- endoskopické operace přirozenými otvory metody MeSH
- laparoskopie MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- pacientova volba MeSH
- percepce MeSH
- průzkumy a dotazníky MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
AIM: To investigate perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) as a potential technique for appendectomy. METHODS: One hundred patients undergoing endoscopy and 100 physicians were given a questionnaire describing in detail the techniques of NOTES and laparoscopic appendectomy. They were asked about the reasons for their preference, choice of orifice, and extent of complication risk they were willing to accept. RESULTS: Fifty patients (50%) and only 21 physicians (21%) preferred NOTES (P < 0.001). Patients had previously heard of NOTES less frequently (7% vs 73%, P < 0.001) and had undergone endoscopy more frequently (88% vs 36%, P < 0.001) than physicians. Absence of hernia was the most common reason for NOTES preference in physicians (80% vs 44%, P = 0.003), whereas reduced pain was the most common reason in patients (66% vs 52%). Physicians were more likely to refuse NOTES as a novel and unsure technique (P < 0.001) and having an increased risk of infection (P < 0.001). The preferred access site in both groups was colon followed by stomach, with vagina being rarely preferred. In multivariable modeling, those with high-school education [odds ratio (OR): 2.68, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.23-5.83] and prior colonoscopy (OR: 2.10, 95% CI: 1.05-4.19) were more likely to prefer NOTES over laparoscopic appendectomy. There was a steep decline in NOTES preference with increased rate of procedural complications. Male patients were more likely to consent to their wives vaginal NOTES appendectomy than male physicians (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The preference of NOTES for appendectomy was greater in patients than physicians and was related to reduced pain and absence of hernia rather than lack of scarring.
Department of Medical Informatics Institute of Computer Science AS CR 18207 Prague Czech Republic
Hepatology Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine 14021 Prague Czech Republic
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc12034530
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20200505133336.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 121023s2012 ch f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.3748/wjg.v18.i15.1800 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)22553405
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a ch
- 100 1_
- $a Hucl, Tomáš $7 xx0077546 $u Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, 14021 Prague, Czech Republic. tomas.hucl@ikem.cz
- 245 10
- $a Patient and physician perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic appendectomy / $c Tomas Hucl, Adela Saglova, Marek Benes, Matej Kocik, Martin Oliverius, Zdenek Valenta, Julius Spicak
- 520 9_
- $a AIM: To investigate perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) as a potential technique for appendectomy. METHODS: One hundred patients undergoing endoscopy and 100 physicians were given a questionnaire describing in detail the techniques of NOTES and laparoscopic appendectomy. They were asked about the reasons for their preference, choice of orifice, and extent of complication risk they were willing to accept. RESULTS: Fifty patients (50%) and only 21 physicians (21%) preferred NOTES (P < 0.001). Patients had previously heard of NOTES less frequently (7% vs 73%, P < 0.001) and had undergone endoscopy more frequently (88% vs 36%, P < 0.001) than physicians. Absence of hernia was the most common reason for NOTES preference in physicians (80% vs 44%, P = 0.003), whereas reduced pain was the most common reason in patients (66% vs 52%). Physicians were more likely to refuse NOTES as a novel and unsure technique (P < 0.001) and having an increased risk of infection (P < 0.001). The preferred access site in both groups was colon followed by stomach, with vagina being rarely preferred. In multivariable modeling, those with high-school education [odds ratio (OR): 2.68, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.23-5.83] and prior colonoscopy (OR: 2.10, 95% CI: 1.05-4.19) were more likely to prefer NOTES over laparoscopic appendectomy. There was a steep decline in NOTES preference with increased rate of procedural complications. Male patients were more likely to consent to their wives vaginal NOTES appendectomy than male physicians (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The preference of NOTES for appendectomy was greater in patients than physicians and was related to reduced pain and absence of hernia rather than lack of scarring.
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a apendektomie $x metody $7 D001062
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a laparoskopie $7 D010535
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a endoskopické operace přirozenými otvory $x metody $7 D057605
- 650 _2
- $a pacientova volba $7 D057240
- 650 _2
- $a percepce $7 D010465
- 650 _2
- $a průzkumy a dotazníky $7 D011795
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Pulkertová, Adéla $7 xx0129501 $u Hepatology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, 14021 Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Beneš, Marek. $7 xx0195208 $u Hepatology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, 14021 Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Kočík, Matěj. $7 xx0244088 $u Department of Transplantation Surgery, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, 14021 Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Oliverius, Martin $7 xx0106430 $u Department of Transplantation Surgery, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, 14021 Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Valenta, Zdeněk, $d 1955- $7 xx0074213 $u Department of Medical Informatics, Institute of Computer Science AS CR, 18207 Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Špičák, Julius, $d 1952- $7 jn20000919536 $u Hepatology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, 14021 Prague, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00006918 $t World journal of gastroenterology WJG $x 1007-9327 $g Roč. 18, č. 15 (2012), s. 1800-1805
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22553405 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20121023 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20200505133334 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 956540 $s 792027
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2012 $b 18 $c 15 $d 1800-1805 $i 1007-9327 $m World journal of gastroenterology $n World J Gastroenterol $x MED00006918
- GRA __
- $a NT11236 $p MZ0
- LZP __
- $b NLK112 $a Pubmed-20121023