You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • EVAN-G score in patients undergoing minimally invasive gynecology oncologic surgery in an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program

Article Text

Article menu

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Original research
EVAN-G score in patients undergoing minimally invasive gynecology oncologic surgery in an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program
  1. Domenico Ferraioli1,2,
  2. Camille Pouliquen3,
  3. Camille Jauffret1,
  4. Axelle Charavil1,
  5. Guillaume Blache1,
  6. Marion Faucher3,
  7. Gilles Houvenaeghel1,4,
  8. Houssein El Hajj1 and
  9. Eric Lambaudie1,4
  1. 1Surgery, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, France
  2. 2Laboratory of Translational Oncology, University of Genoa, Genova, Liguria, Italy
  3. 3Anaesthesiology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, France
  4. 4INSERM, IRD, SESSTIM, Aix Marseille University, Marseille, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, France
  1. Correspondence to Dr, PhD Domenico Ferraioli, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille 13009, France; ferraioli.domenico{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has been proven to decrease the length of hospital stay without increasing re-admission rates or complications. There are limited data on the satisfaction of patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery for gynecologic malignancy within ERAS programs. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient satisfaction after minimally invasive surgery for gynecologic malignancy within the ERAS program using the 'Evaluation du Vécu de l’Anésthésie Génerale (EVAN-G)' questionnaire.

Methods This observational retrospective study was conducted at the Paoli-Calmettes Institute between June 2016 and December 2018. All the included patients underwent minimally invasive surgery for a gynecologic malignancy. EVAN-G, a validated questionnaire, was used to measure peri-operative patient satisfaction. This questionnaire consists of 26 items assessing six elements: attention, privacy, information, pain, discomfort, and waiting time. Each element is assessed via a 5-step numerical scale and then transformed to a 0–100 scale according to the degree of satisfaction. The EVAN-G questionnaire was given to patients before surgery and collected during the post-operative consultation (2–3 weeks after surgery).

Results A total of 175 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery for gynecologic malignancy within the ERAS program. Of these, 92 patients were included in the study and 83 patients were excluded. The overall patient compliance rate with our ERAS program was 90%. The analysis of the EVAN-G score of all participants showed an overall high level of satisfaction with a mean score of 81.9 (range 41.6–100). Patients with peri-operative complications or having prolonged hospitalization also showed high levels of satisfaction with a mean score of 80.5 (41.6-100) and 83.2(55-100), respectively.

Conclusion In this study we showed a high patient satisfaction with the ERAS program. When comparing length of stay and complications, neither extended length of stay nor development of complications after minimally invasive surgery impacted patient satisfaction.

  • preoperative period
  • postoperative period
  • preoperative care
  • postoperative care
  • surgical oncology

https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2019-001173

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors EL and DF designed the study. CP, CJ, AC, and MF collected and assembled the data. DF, GB, and MF analyzed and interpreted the data. DF and EL wrote the manuscript. DF, EL, HElH, and GH revised and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Ethics approval This work was approved by our institutional review board (IPC—Comité d’Orientation Stratégique). All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were done in according to the French ethical standards and with the 2008 Helsinki declaration.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Data availability statement All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. The data are deposited in the archive of the Pauli-Calmettes Institute and are accessible by password. To use the data contact Professor Lambaudie (e-mail: lambaudiee@ipc.unicancer.fr) The data can be used for research studies.