Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Surg Obes Relat Dis ; 2024 Jul 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39127531

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Undetected obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is highly prevalent in patients undergoing bariatric surgery and increases perioperative risks. Screening for OSA using preoperative polygraphy (PG) with subsequent continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is costly and time-consuming. Postoperative continuous pulse oximetry (CPOX) is less invasive, and is hypothesized to be a safe and cost-effective alternative. OBJECTIVES: This nationwide multicenter prospective observational cohort study compared CPOX monitoring with OSA-screening using PG. SETTING: High-volume bariatric centers. METHODS: Patients were either postoperatively monitored using CPOX without preoperative OSA-screening, or underwent preoperative PG and CPAP treatment when OSA was diagnosed. Cohort placement was based on local hospital protocols. Cost-effectiveness was analyzed using quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and healthcare costs. Surgical outcomes were also analyzed. Propensity score matching was used in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: A total of 1390 patients were included. QALYs were similar between groups at baseline and 1-year postoperatively. Postoperative complications, intensive care unit (ICU)-admissions and admissions, particularly OSA-related, did not differ between groups. Mean costs per patient/year in the CPOX group was €3094 versus €3680 in the PG group; mean difference €-586 (95% CI €-933-€-242). Following propensity score matching, 1090 of 1390 included patients remained, and similar findings for cost-effectiveness, complications, and ICU admissions were observed. CONCLUSION: CPOX monitoring without preoperative OSA-screening was not associated with higher complication or readmission rates compared to PG. CPOX resulted in lower costs from a healthcare perspective and can therefore be considered a cost-effective alternative to routine OSA-screening in patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

2.
BMJ Open ; 10(10): e038830, 2020 10 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33033026

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Despite the high prevalence of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) in obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery, OSA is undiagnosed in the majority of patients and thus untreated. While untreated OSA is associated with an increased risk of preoperative and postoperative complications, no evidence-based guidelines on perioperative care for these patients are available. The aim of the POPCORN study (Post-Operative Pulse oximetry without OSA sCreening vs perioperative continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment following OSA scReeNing by polygraphy (PG)) is to evaluate which perioperative strategy is the most cost-effective for obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery without a history of OSA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this multicentre observational cohort study, data from 1380 patients who will undergo bariatric surgery will be collected. Patients will receive either postoperative care with pulse oximetry monitoring and supplemental oxygen during the first postoperative night, or care that includes preoperative PG and CPAP treatment in case of moderate or severe OSA. Local protocols for perioperative care in each participating hospital will determine into which cohort a patient is placed. The primary outcome is cost-effectiveness, which will be calculated by comparing all healthcare costs with the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs, calculated using EQ-5D questionnaires). Secondary outcomes are mortality, complications within 30 days after surgery, readmissions, reoperations, length of stay, weight loss, generic quality of life (QOL), OSA-specific QOL, OSA symptoms and CPAP adherence. Patients will receive questionnaires before surgery and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery to report QALYs and other patient-reported outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval from the Medical Research Ethics Committees United was granted in accordance with the Dutch law for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) (reference number W17.050). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presented at (inter)national conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR6991.


Asunto(s)
Cirugía Bariátrica , Obesidad Mórbida , Apnea Obstructiva del Sueño , Cirugía Bariátrica/economía , Estudios de Cohortes , Presión de las Vías Aéreas Positiva Contínua/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Obesidad Mórbida/complicaciones , Obesidad Mórbida/economía , Obesidad Mórbida/cirugía , Obesidad Mórbida/terapia , Estudios Observacionales como Asunto , Oximetría/economía , Oxígeno/administración & dosificación , Atención Perioperativa , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida , Apnea Obstructiva del Sueño/economía , Apnea Obstructiva del Sueño/etiología , Apnea Obstructiva del Sueño/cirugía , Apnea Obstructiva del Sueño/terapia
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA