Article Sidebar
Date Published:
11/04/2022
Abstract Views: 255
Views PDF: 146
Views PDF: 146
Issue
Section
Research Articles
How to Cite
Đoàn, T. C., Lê, V. T., Trần, H. V., Ngô, T. H., & Nguyễn, T. H. (2022). Recovery Results Of Patterns After Bililiology Surgery And Some Related Factors At Military Central Hospital 108. Viet Nam Journal of Traditional Medicine and Pharmacy, 43(2), 10-14. https://doi.org/10.60117/vjmap.v43i2.84
Recovery Results Of Patterns After Bililiology Surgery And Some Related Factors At Military Central Hospital 108
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: The study was conducted to describe the recovery level of patients after gallstone surgery at 108 Military Central Hospital. Analysis of care outcomes on the patient's recovery process and some related factors.
Subjects and method research: 152 patients were cared for and monitored after laparoscopic surgery to treat gallstones at 108 Military Central Hospital from January 2021 to October 2021.
Prospective descriptive study.
Result and conclusion: The average point of overall recovery of the patients was 107.66 ± 12.83, 13.2% of the patients recovered well, 78.9% of the patients recovered at a moderate level and 7.9% of the patients recovered. poor recovery.
Article Details
References
1. Trần Bình Giang và các cộng sự (1998), Phẫu thuật cắt túi mật nội soi tại Bệnh Viện Việt Đức, Ngoại Khoa. 33(6), tr. 7-22.
2. Chu Thị Giang Thanh (2016), Mối liên quan giữa đau và mệt mỏi sau mổ trên bệnh nhân phẫu thuật ổ bụng tại ĐăkLăk, Kỷ yếu Hội nghị khoa học - công nghệ tuổi trẻ các trường Đại học cao đẳng y - dược Việt Nam lần thứ 18.
3. M. Talebpour and M. Panahi (2007), “New aspects in laparoscopic cholecystectomy”, J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 17(3), pp. 290-5.
4. François Demumieux, et al. (2020), “Validation of the translated Quality of Recovery-15 questionnaire in a French-speaking population”, British Journal of Anaesthesia. 124(6), pp. 761-767.
5. Donggyeong Kim, Jay Kyoung Kim, and Jinseok Yeo (2020), “Translation and Validation of the Korean Version of the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Score QoR-15”, BioMed Research International. 2020.
6. J Kleif, et al. (2018), “Systematic review of the QoR-15 score, a patient-reported outcome measure measuring quality of recovery after surgery and anaesthesia”, British Journal of Anaesthesia. 120(1), pp. 28-36.
7. Peter A Stark, Paul S Myles, and Justin A Burke (2013), “Development and psychometric evaluation of a postoperative quality of recovery score: the QoR-15”, Anesthesiology. 118(6), pp. 1332-1340.
2. Chu Thị Giang Thanh (2016), Mối liên quan giữa đau và mệt mỏi sau mổ trên bệnh nhân phẫu thuật ổ bụng tại ĐăkLăk, Kỷ yếu Hội nghị khoa học - công nghệ tuổi trẻ các trường Đại học cao đẳng y - dược Việt Nam lần thứ 18.
3. M. Talebpour and M. Panahi (2007), “New aspects in laparoscopic cholecystectomy”, J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 17(3), pp. 290-5.
4. François Demumieux, et al. (2020), “Validation of the translated Quality of Recovery-15 questionnaire in a French-speaking population”, British Journal of Anaesthesia. 124(6), pp. 761-767.
5. Donggyeong Kim, Jay Kyoung Kim, and Jinseok Yeo (2020), “Translation and Validation of the Korean Version of the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Score QoR-15”, BioMed Research International. 2020.
6. J Kleif, et al. (2018), “Systematic review of the QoR-15 score, a patient-reported outcome measure measuring quality of recovery after surgery and anaesthesia”, British Journal of Anaesthesia. 120(1), pp. 28-36.
7. Peter A Stark, Paul S Myles, and Justin A Burke (2013), “Development and psychometric evaluation of a postoperative quality of recovery score: the QoR-15”, Anesthesiology. 118(6), pp. 1332-1340.