oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A review of the scope and measurement of postoperative quality of recovery
Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Management, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville Vic, Australia.
Department for Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Institution of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Örebro University Hospital. Department of Surgery; Institution of Molecular medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Insitutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2636-4745
Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville Vic, Australia.
2014 (English)In: Anaesthesia, ISSN 0003-2409, E-ISSN 1365-2044, Vol. 69, no 11, p. 1266-1278Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

To date, postoperative quality of recovery lacks a universally accepted definition and assessment technique. Current quality of recovery assessment tools vary in their development, breadth of assessment, validation, use of continuous vs dichotomous outcomes and focus on individual vs group recovery. They have progressed from identifying pure restitution of physiological parameters to multidimensional assessments of postoperative function and patient-focused outcomes. This review focuses on the progression of these tools towards an as yet unreached ideal that would provide multidimensional assessment of recovery over time at the individual and group level. A literature search identified 11 unique recovery assessment tools. The Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale assesses recovery in multiple domains, including physiological, nociceptive, emotive, activities of daily living, cognition and patient satisfaction. It addresses recovery over time and compares individual patient data with base line, thus describing resumption of capacities and is an acceptable method for identification of individual patient recovery.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Hoboken, USA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014. Vol. 69, no 11, p. 1266-1278
National Category
Anesthesiology and Intensive Care
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-40275DOI: 10.1111/anae.12730ISI: 000343808400012PubMedID: 24888412Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84908544748OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-40275DiVA, id: diva2:776771
Note

Funding Agencies:

Baxter Healthcare

ERAS Society 

Baxter

Available from: 2015-01-08 Created: 2015-01-08 Last updated: 2018-06-15Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records BETA

Ljungqvist, Olle

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ljungqvist, Olle
By organisation
Örebro University Hospital
In the same journal
Anaesthesia
Anesthesiology and Intensive Care

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 431 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf