Resumen
Introducción: la atención sanitaria integral incluye la satisfacción en la atención del paciente y la calidad de servicios médicos. Se han empleado instrumentos con alta precisión para evaluar la calidad de recuperación anestésica (CRA), como el cuestionario validado QoR-15, el cual considera aspectos sobre emocionalidad, bienestar físico y psicológico, dolor y autonomía física.
Objetivo: evaluar la CRA en pacientes postoperados sometidos a anestesia.
Material y métodos: estudio observacional, descriptivo, transversal, realizado de marzo a agosto de 2022. Se incluyeron 80 pacientes de 18 a 70 años sometidos a procedimiento anestésico y a quienes se les aplicó el cuestionario de calidad anestésica QoR-15 a las 24 horas de postoperados. Se empleó estadística descriptiva de acuerdo con la prueba de Shapiro-Wilk. Las variables cuantitativas se analizaron con U de Mann-Whitney y las cualitativas con chi cuadrada; se consideró significativo un valor de p < 0.05.
Resultados: los 80 pacientes obtuvieron 122.06 (52-147) puntos en el cuestionario QoR-15 y su CRA se consideró como buena; en los pacientes sometidos a técnicas anestésicas regionales la CRA fue excelente en 42.5% y 10% tuvieron anestesia general balanceada, p = 0.011.
Conclusión: la CRA fue mayor con las técnicas anestésicas regionales. La evaluación de la calidad mediante herramientas validadas permite su evaluación objetiva y hacer seguimiento del proceso de atención en los servicios médicos.
Abstract
Background: Comprehensive health care includes the evaluation of satisfaction in patient care and the quality of medical services. High-precision instruments have been used to assess the quality of recovery after anesthesia (QoR), such as the QoR-15 questionnaire, a validated and accurate assessment tool that considers aspects of emotionality, physical and psychological well-being, pain, and autonomy.
Objective: To assess QoR in postoperative patients who underwent anesthesia.
Material and methods: Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study, carried out from March to August 2022. 80 patients from 18 to 70 years who underwent an anesthetic procedure and to which the anesthetic quality QoR-15 questionnaire was administered 24 hours after surgery were included. Descriptive statistics were performed according to the Shapiro-Wilk test. For quantitative variables it was used Mann-Whitney U, and for qualitative variables chi-squared; it was considered significant a value of p < 0.05.
Results: The 80 patients obtained a QoR-15 score of 122.06 (52-147), and their QoR was considered good. Anesthetic recovery quality in patients undergoing regional anesthetic techniques was excellent in 42.5% and 10% had balanced general anesthesia, p = 0.011.
Conclusions: QoR was higher with regional anesthetic techniques. Quality assessment through validated tools allows objective evaluation and monitoring of the care process in medical services.
Tristán-Martínez P, Doubova SV, Sauceda-Valenzuela AL. Calidad de atención en pacientes con cáncer de próstata atendidos en México. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2022;60(3):275-82. Disponible en: http://revistamedica.imss.gob.mx/editorial/index.php/revista_medica/article/view/4402/4374.
Arriaga-Dávila JJ, Pérez-Rodríguez G, Borrayo-Sánchez G. Dimensiones de calidad enfocadas en el protocolo de atención código infarto. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2017;55(3):382-7. Disponible en: http://revistamedica.imss.gob.mx/editorial/index.php/revista_medica/article/view/797/2100.
Recart A. Medicina perioperatoria ¿El futuro de la anestesiología? Rev Chil Anestesia. 2018;47(3):166-75. doi: 10.25237/revchilanestv47n03.03.
Porter M. ¿What Is Value in Health Care? N Engl J Med. 2010;363(26):2477-81. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1011024.
Tiret L, Desmonts J, Hatton F, et al. Complications associated with anesthesia: A prospective survey in France. Can Anaesth Soc J. 1986;33:336-44. doi: 10.1007/bf03010747.
Beaussier M, Raucoules-Aimé M. Métodos de evaluación y escalas de los estadios del despertar. EMC Anestesia-Reanimación. 2016;42(2):1-13. doi: 10.1016/S1280-4703(16)77452-4.
Kluivers K, Riphagen I, Vierhout M, et al. Systematic review on recovery specific quality-of-life instruments. Surgery. 2008;143(2):206-15. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2007.08.017.
Myles P, Hunt J, Nightingale C, et al. Development and psychometric testing of a quality of recovery score after general anesthesia and surgery in adults. Anesth Analg. 1999;88(1):83-90. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199901000-00016.
Stark P, Myles P, Burke J. Development and psychometric evaluation of a postoperative quality of recovery score. Anesthesiology. 2013;118(6):1332-40. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318289b84b.
Gornall B, Myles P, Smith C, et al. Measurement of quality of recovery using the QoR-40: A quantitative systematic review. Br J Anaesth. 2013;111(2):161-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aet014.
Myles P, Weitkamp B, Jones K, et al. Validity and reliability of a postoperative quality of recovery score: The QoR-40. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84(1):11-5. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bja.a013366.
Kleif J, Gögenur I. Severity classification of the quality of recovery-15 score-An observational study. J Surg Res. 2018;225:101-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2017.12.040.
Campfort M, Cayla C, Lasocki S, et al. Early quality of recovery according to QoR-15 score is associated with one-month postoperative complications after elective surgery. J Clin Anesth. 2022;78:110638. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2021.110638.
Guimarães-Pereira L, Costa M, Sousa G, et al. Quality of recovery after anaesthesia measured with QoR-40: A prospective observational study. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2016;66(4):369-75. doi: 10.1016/j.bjane.2014.11.010.
Chazapis M, Walker E, Rooms M, et al. Measuring quality of recovery-15 after day case surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2016;116(2):241-8. doi: 10.1093/bja/aev413.
Blanchard C, Labrecque M, Ruckdeschel J, et al. Physician behaviors, patient perceptions, and patient characteristics as predictors of satisfaction of hospitalized adult cancer patients. Cancer. 1990;65(1):186-92. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19900101)65:1<186: aid-cncr2820650136>3.0.co;2-4.
Moro E, Nóbrega M, Gouvêa M, et al. Quality of recovery from anesthesia in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery of the lower limbs. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2016;66(6):642-50. doi: 10.1016/j.bjane.2015.05.001.
Myles P, McLeod A, Hunt J, et al. Sex differences in speed of emergence and quality of recovery after anesthesia: Cohort study. BMJ. 2001 24;322(7288):710-1. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7288.710.
Buchanan F, Myles P, Cicuttini F. Effect of patient sex on general anesthesia and recovery. Br J Anaesth. 2011;106(6):832-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aer094.
Kleif J, Edwards H, Sort R, et al. Translation and validation of the Danish version of the postoperative quality of recovery score QoR-15. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2015;59(7):912-20. doi: 10.1111/aas.12525.
Marinho R, Lusquinhos J, Carvalho B et al. Calidad de la recuperación después de la cirugía para el tratamiento del cáncer. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2018;65(8):426-33. doi: 10.1016/j.redar.2018.04.008.
Christelis N, Wallace S, Sage C, et al. An enhanced recovery after surgery program for hip and knee arthroplasty. Med J Aust. 2015;202(7):363-8. doi: 10.5694/mja14.00601.
De los Ríos J, Cordero I, Pérez G et al. Satisfacción de la recuperación anestésica postoperatoria, según escala en pacientes con anestesia general y neuroaxial. Rev Mex Anest. 2017;40(4):264-72.
Cho H, Kwon H, Song S, et al. Quality of postoperative recovery after upper-arm vascular surgery for hemodialysis in patients with end-stage renal disease: A prospective comparison of cervical epidural anesthesia vs general anesthesia. Medicine. 2020;99(3):18773. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000018773.
Nair G, Wong D, Chan E, et al. Mode of anesthesia and quality of recovery after breast surgery: A case series of 100 patients. Cureus. 2021;13(3):e13822. doi: 10.7759/cureus.13822.
Pogatzki-Zahn E, Segelcke D, Schug S. Postoperative pain from mechanisms to treatment. Pain Rep. 2017;2(2):e588. doi: 10.1097/PR9.0000000000000588.
Young A, Buvanendran A. Recent advances in multimodal analgesia. Anesthesiol Clin. 2012;30(1):91-100. doi: 10.1016/j.anclin.2011.12.002.
Gan T, Belani K, Bergese S, et al. Fourth Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting. Anesth Analg. 2020;131(2):411-48. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004833.
Fearon K, Ljungqvist O, Von Meyenfeldt M, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery: A consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection. Clin Nutr. 2005;24(3):466-77. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2005.02.002.
Kleif J, Waage J, Christensen K, et al. Systematic review of the QoR-15 score, a patient- reported outcome measure measuring quality of recovery after surgery and anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 2018;120(1):28-36. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2017.11.013.
Léger M, Campfort M, Cayla C, et al. Validation of an alternative French version of the Quality of Recovery-15 Score: the FQoR-15. Br J Anaesth. 2020;125(4):345-47. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2020.05.052.
Shahsavari H, Ghane G, Ghiyasvandian S, et al. Psychometric properties of the Persian version of the quality of recovery-15 questionnaire. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2021;5(1):108. doi: 0.1186/s41687-021-00351-9.
Myles PS. Structural validity of the 15-item quality of recovery scale. Br J Anaesth. 2021;127(4):138-9. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.07.006.
Myles P, Shulman M, Reilly J, et al. Measurement of quality of recovery after surgery using the 15-item quality of recovery scale: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2022;128(6):1029-39. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2022.03.009.
Myles P, Myles D. An Updated Minimal Clinically Important Difference for the QoR-15 Scale. Anesthesiology. 2021;135(5):934-5. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003977.