Improved Clinical Outcomes of Outpatient Enhanced Recovery Hip and Knee Replacements in Comparison to Standard Inpatient Procedures: A Study of Patients Who Experienced Both
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND: The benefits of combining enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) interventions with an outpatient program for total hip/knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) are uncertain. The primary objective was to compare adverse event rate and secondly to compare pain management, functional recovery, PROMs and satisfaction in patients who experienced both an ERAS-outpatient protocol and standard-inpatient care.METHODS: We conducted an ambidirectional single subject cohort study on 48 consecutive patients who experienced both a standard-inpatient and an ERAS-outpatient THA/TKA (contralaterally). We compared complications according to Clavien-Dindo scale and Comprehensive Complications Index (CCI), and unplanned episodes of care. Postoperative pain assessed with a numeric rating scale, opioid consumption in morphine milligram equivalents, functional recovery, patient-reported outcome measures (WOMAC, KOOS, HOOS, Forgotten Joint Score and Patient Joint Perception) and patients’ satisfaction were also evaluated.RESULTS: Following the ERAS-outpatient surgery, complication rates were reduced by more than 50% (2.1 vs 4.4, p<0.001), CCI was significantly lower (12.3 vs 19.1, p<0.001), and similar unplanned episodes of care were observed (p>0.999). In the first 8 postoperative hours, perceived pain was similar (p>0.805) while opioid consumption was significantly reduced (9.3 vs 26.5, p<0.001). Patients walked, climbed stairs, showered, performed activities of daily living, practised sports, went back to work sooner (p<0.001), but PROMs were similar between groups at the last follow-up (p> 0.188). Patients were more satisfied of the ERAS-outpatient pathway and recommended it significantly more (p <0.002). CONCLUSION: Compared to the conventional inpatient care, our ERAS-outpatient protocol proved to be safer, enable faster functional recovery, and improve patients’ satisfaction which highlight the importance of following ERAS principles when implementing an outpatient THA/TKA program.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".