The Effectiveness of Patient Education on Laparoscopic Surgery Postoperative Outcomes to Determine Whether Direct Coaching Is the Best Approach: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As of 2022, patient adherence to postoperative guidelines can reduce the risk of complications by up to 52.4% following laparoscopic abdominal surgery. With the availability of various preoperative education interventions (POEIs), understanding which POEI results in improvement in patient outcomes across the procedures is imperative. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine which POEI could be the most effective on patient outcomes by systematically reviewing all the POEIs reported in the literature. METHODS: In total, 4753 articles investigating various POEIs (eg, videos, presentations, mobile apps, and one-on-one education or coaching) were collected from the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases. Inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing abdominal laparoscopic surgery, randomized controlled trials, and studies that provided postoperative outcomes. Exclusion criteria included studies not published in English and with no outcomes reported. Title and abstract and full-text articles with POEI randomized controlled studies were screened based on the above criteria through a blinded, dual review using Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation). Study quality was assessed through the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The included articles were analyzed for educational content, intervention timing, intervention type, and postoperative outcomes appropriate for a particular surgery. RESULTS: Only 17 studies matched our criteria, with 1831 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, bariatric surgery (gastric bypass and gastric sleeve), and colectomy. In total, 15 studies reported a statistically significant improvement in at least 1 patient postoperative outcome. None of these studies were found to have an overall high risk of bias according to Cochrane standards. In total, 41% (7/17) of the included studies using direct individual education improved outcomes in almost all surgery types, while educational videos had the greatest statistically significant impact for anxiety, nausea, and pain postoperatively (P<.01). Direct group education demonstrated significant improvement in weight, BMI, exercise, and depressive symptoms in 33% (2/6) of the laparoscopic gastric bypass studies. CONCLUSIONS: Direct education (individual or group based) positively impacts postoperative laparoscopic surgery outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023438698; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=438698.
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 | 0.030 | 0.115 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".