切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肥胖与代谢病电子杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 04 ›› Issue (03) : 123 -128. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9605.2018.03.001

所属专题: 文献

论著

减重代谢外科多学科随访模式构建实证研究
杨宁琍1, 刘瑞萍1, 管蔚1, 林士波1, 梁辉1,()   
  1. 1. 210029 南京,南京医科大学第一附属医院普外科
  • 收稿日期:2018-07-26 出版日期:2018-08-30
  • 通信作者: 梁辉
  • 基金资助:
    2013年南京医科大学医患沟通校级重点项目(2013001)

Empirical study on the construction of multidisciplinary follow-up model in bariatric and metabolic surgery

Ningli Yang1, Ruiping Liu1, Wei Guan1, Shibo Lin1, Hui Liang1,()   

  1. 1. Department of General Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210029, China
  • Received:2018-07-26 Published:2018-08-30
  • Corresponding author: Hui Liang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Liang Hui, Email:
引用本文:

杨宁琍, 刘瑞萍, 管蔚, 林士波, 梁辉. 减重代谢外科多学科随访模式构建实证研究[J]. 中华肥胖与代谢病电子杂志, 2018, 04(03): 123-128.

Ningli Yang, Ruiping Liu, Wei Guan, Shibo Lin, Hui Liang. Empirical study on the construction of multidisciplinary follow-up model in bariatric and metabolic surgery[J]. Chinese Journal of Obesity and Metabolic Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2018, 04(03): 123-128.

目的

探讨多学科随访模式在减重代谢外科质量控制中的实证研究。

方法

回顾性分析2016年1月至2016年12月在南京医科大学第一附属医院减重代谢外科接受手术的110例肥胖症患者的临床资料。2016年1月至2016年6月入院的患者由外科医生主导随访,作为传统减重管理组(对照组);2016年7月至2016年12月入院的患者,其术后随访由多学科团队共同完成,作为多学科随访管理组(研究组)。其中研究组57例,男16例,女41例,年龄(46.1±10.9)岁;对照组53例,男14例,女39例,年龄(42.2±8.3)岁。多学科随访管理组由减重外科医生、减重管理师、内分泌科医生、营养科医生组成;传统减重管理随访组由外科医生和减重管理师构成。比较两组患者的术后随访率、医疗服务满意率和术后营养并发症的发生率、术后胃肠道并发症的发生率、多余体重减少率。

结果

研究组术后1年随访率为82.5%,明显高于对照组(χ2=14.907,P<0.05);研究组患者的多余体重减少率为(83.1±16.1)%,明显高于对照组(t=3.959,P<0.05);研究组患者对手术效果的满意率为93.0%(53/57),明显高于对照组的73.6%(39/53)(χ2=4.410,P<0.05);研究组患者营养并发症发生率为5.3%(3/57),明显低于对照组的22.6%(12/53)(χ2=4.961,P<0.05)。

结论

多学科随访模式能适应代谢外科多学科综合治疗的需要,在提高患者随访率、降低术后并发症的发生、增加患者术后多余体重减少率、提高患者满意度方面,较传统减重管理模式有明显优势。

Objective

To explore the empirical study on multidisciplinary follow-up model in quality control of bariatric and metabolic surgery.

Methods

The clinical data of 110 patients, who underwent surgery in the department of bariatric and metabolic surgery of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from January 2016 to December 2016, were retrospectively analyzed. In the first half year, the follow-up was mainly conducted by surgeons. In the second half year, a multidisciplinary follow-up group was established. These patients were divided into multidisciplinary follow-up management group (research group) and traditional management group (control group). There were 57 cases in the research group with 16 males and 41 females, and the mean age was (46.1±10.9) years. There were 53 cases in the control group with 14 males and 39 females, and the mean age was (42.2±8.3) years. The multidisciplinary follow-up mode includes bariatric surgeons, case managers, endocrinologist and dietitian; while the traditional management follow-up group only includes bariatric surgeons and case managers. Postoperative follow-up rate, patients’ satisfaction to medical services, postoperative nutritional complications, postoperative gastrointestinal complications and excess weight loss between these two groups were compared.

Results

The 1-year follow-up rate in the research group was 82.5%, which was significantly higher than the control group (P<0.05); the rate of excess weight loss in the research group was (83.1+16.1)%, which was significantly higher than the control group; the rate of patients' satisfaction to surgical outcomes was 93% (53/57) in the research group, which was significantly higher than the control group (73.6%, 39/53, χ2=4.410, P<0.05); the rate of nutritional complications in the research group was 5.3% (3/57), which was significantly lower than the control group (22.6%, 12/53, χ2=4.961, P<0.05).

Conclusion

Multidisciplinary follow-up model can adapt to the needs of multidisciplinary treatment in metabolic surgery, improve the follow-up rate, increase the rate of postoperative excess weight loss and patients’ satisfaction, and decrease postoperative complication rate. Thus, it has obvious advantages compared with the traditional management model.

图1 多学科随访临床路径
表1 对照组和研究组术后情况的比较
表2 对照组和研究组术后多余体重减少率的比较
[1]
Ng M,Fleming T,Robinson M, et al. Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980-2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013[J]. Lancet, 2014, 384(9945): 766-781.
[2]
Bray G. Drug treatment of obesity: don't throw the baby out with the bath water[J]. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1998, 67(1):1-2.
[3]
Gloy VL,Briel M,Bhatt DL, et al. Bariatric surgery versus non-surgical treatment for obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials[J]. Bmj, 2013, 347: f5934.
[4]
Heo YS,Park JM,Kim YJ, et al. Bariatric surgery versus conventional therapy in obese Korea patients: a multicenter retrospective cohort study[J]. J Korean SurgSoc, 2012, 83(6): 335-342.
[5]
Colquitt J L,Pickett K,Loveman E, et al. Surgery for weight loss in adults[M]// The Cochrane Library. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2014:CD003641.
[6]
Courcoulas AP,Christian NJ,Belle SH, et al. Weight change and health outcomes at 3 years after bariatric surgery among individuals with severe obesity[J]. JAMA, 2013, 310(22): 2416-2425.
[7]
Driscoll S,Gregory DM,Fardy JM, et al. Long-term health-related quality of life in bariatric surgery patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Obesity, 2016, 24(1):60-70.
[8]
梁辉, 吴鸿浩.从减重手术历史看减重术式选择[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志2012, 15(11):1109-1111.
[9]
Stewart KE,Olbrisch M,Bean MK. Back on track: Confronting post-surgical weight gain[J]. Bariatric Nursing and Surgical Patient Care, 2010, 5(2):179-185.
[10]
Karlsson J,Taft C,Ryden A, et al. Ten-year trends in health-related quality of life after surgical and conventional treatment for severe obesity: the SOS intervention study[J]. Int J Obes (Lond), 2007, 31(8):1248-1261.
[11]
Freedman DS. Obesity-United States, 1988-2008[J]. Mmwr Suppl, 2011, 60(1):73-77.
[12]
Padwal R S,Sharma A M,Fradette M, et al. The evaluating self-management and educational support in severely obese patients awaiting multidisciplinary bariatric care (EVOLUTION) trial: rationale and design[J]. BMC Health Services Research, 2013, 13(1):1-10.
[13]
Brethauer SA,Kim J,El CM, et al. Standardized outcomes reporting in metabolic and bariatric surgery[J]. ObesSurg, 2015, 25(4): 587-606.
[14]
吴凡, 邓笑伟. 营养治疗和远程随访干预对肥胖患者减重的效果研究[C]// 健康产业论坛暨第五次全国健康管理学学术会议. 2013.
[15]
张莉萍, 戴晓冬, 杨宁琍, 等. 延伸健康教育路径对减重术后患者生活质量的影响[J]. 中华现代护理杂志, 2014, 20(31): 3964-3967.
[16]
洪鑫芳, 贺媛, 曾强,等. 健康信念模式在减重行为中的运用[C]// 健康产业论坛暨第五次全国健康管理学学术会议. 2013.
[17]
Stewart F,Avenell A. Behavioural Interventions for Severe Obesity Before and/or After Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis[J]. Obesity Surgery, 2016, 26(6):1203-1214.
[18]
National Clinical Guideline Centre (UK). Obesity: identification, assessment and management of overweight and obesity in children, young people and adults: partial update of CG43[M]. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (UK), 2014:12.
[19]
National Health and Medical Research Council. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of overweight and obesity in adults, adolescents and children in Australia (2013)[EB/OL]. Melbourne: National Health and Medical Research Council,2013[2016-03-10].

URL    
[20]
Jensen MD,Ryan DH,Apovian CM, et al. 2013 AHA/ACC/TOS Guideline for the Management of Overweight and Obesity in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and The Obesity Society[J]. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2013, 63(25):2985-3023.
[21]
Christou NV,Sampalis JS,Liberman M, et al. Surgery decreases long-term mortality, morbidity, and health care use in morbidly obese patients[J]. Ann Surg, 2004, 240(3):416-424.
[1] 张梅芳, 谭莹, 朱巧珍, 温昕, 袁鹰, 秦越, 郭洪波, 侯伶秀, 黄文兰, 彭桂艳, 李胜利. 早孕期胎儿头臀长正中矢状切面超声图像的人工智能质控研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 945-950.
[2] 陈舜, 薛恩生, 叶琴. PDCA在持续改进超声危急值管理制度中的价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 974-978.
[3] 吕衡, 董理聪, 谢海琴, 赵卓非, 刘俐, 孙德胜. 基于CT-超声对照的肝脏局灶性病变超声漏诊状况分析:一项单中心横断面质量控制调查报告[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(07): 712-716.
[4] 钟露, 曹省, 宋宏宁, 陈金玲, 周青. 超声心动图定量评估二尖瓣反流程度的质量控制[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(07): 705-711.
[5] 武玺宁, 张培培, 齐振红, 张璟, 赵瑞娜, 孟华, 李建初. 腹膜后神经鞘瘤的超声诊断质量及其影响因素分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(07): 701-704.
[6] 张丽丽, 陈莉, 余美琴, 聂小艳, 王婧玲, 刘婷. PDCA循环法在超声浅表器官亚专科建设中的应用[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(07): 717-721.
[7] 方晔, 谢晓红, 罗辉. 品管圈在提高前列腺癌穿刺检出率中的应用[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(07): 722-727.
[8] 刘会, 郑宇觐, 郭丹丹, 张波. 标准切面质量控制在Ⅲ级产科超声检查胎儿结构异常检出中的应用价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(03): 337-342.
[9] 姚宏伟, 魏鹏宇, 高加勒, 张忠涛. 不断提高腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术的规范化[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 1-4.
[10] 聂锋, 李婉珍. 不打针不吃药不输液徒手治疗糖尿病一例报道[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 354-354.
[11] 苏慧媛, 宋洪涛, 高巍, 武忠. 针刺治疗单纯性肥胖的系统评价和Meta分析[J]. 中华针灸电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 123-128.
[12] 董正妮, 张珑耀. 穴位埋线疗法治疗单纯性肥胖的研究进展[J]. 中华针灸电子杂志, 2023, 12(02): 57-61.
[13] 刘澳, 周菁, 孙永兵, 和俊雅, 林新贝, 乔琦, 李中林, 张建成, 武肖玲, 邹智, 胡扬喜, 肖新广, 吕雪, 李昊, 李永丽. 减重代谢手术后神经影像改变与认知功能评估的研究进展[J]. 中华肥胖与代谢病电子杂志, 2023, 09(03): 203-208.
[14] 陈笑梅, 陈文辉, 赵宛鄂, 郭婕, 苏超, 付志菊, 杨华, 董志勇, 王存川. 可吞咽自吸收新型胃内球囊治疗轻度肥胖症:一例病例报告[J]. 中华肥胖与代谢病电子杂志, 2023, 09(03): 215-217.
[15] 中国医师协会外科医师分会肥胖和糖尿病外科医师委员会, 中国肥胖代谢外科研究协作组. 肥胖代谢外科个案管理术前临床路径中国专家共识(2023版)[J]. 中华肥胖与代谢病电子杂志, 2023, 09(02): 73-82.
阅读次数
全文


摘要