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/OL]. 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/OL]. 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] 罗辉, 方晔. 品管圈在提高甲状腺结节细针穿刺检出率中的应用[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(10): 972-977.
[2] 王益佳, 周青, 曹省, 袁芳洁, 周妍, 张梅. 中国经胸超声心动图检查存图及报告质控现状分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 657-663.
[3] 周易, 张红梅, 尹立雪, 杨浩, 付培. 四川省超声医学质量控制指标动态变化趋势分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 664-670.
[4] 顾莉莉, 姜凡. 安徽省超声产前筛查切面图像质量现状调查情况及分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 671-674.
[5] 王晓娜, 张宁, 宋伟, 杨明, 李丽, 薛红元. 河北省超声医学质量管理与控制现状分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 675-680.
[6] 张亚庆, 黄旴宁, 许珊珊, 刘小蓝. 海南省二级与三级医院超声医学质量控制指标分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 681-685.
[7] 刘畅, 蒋洁, 胥雪冬, 崔立刚, 王淑敏, 陈文. 北京市海淀区医疗机构甲状腺超声检查及TIRADS分类基线调查[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 693-697.
[8] 吴禾禾, 马春亮, 常青, 陈宇, 牛丽娟, 王勇. 超声医学质量控制与住院医师规范化培训相结合的实践探讨[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 698-701.
[9] 高琼, 孙终霞, 张戈, 王敏, 徐子杭, 张佳藤, 蒋天安. 超声诊断胰腺占位性病变漏误诊原因及对策分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 517-521.
[10] 向韵, 卢游, 杨凡. 全氟及多氟烷基化合物暴露与儿童肥胖症相关性研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 569-574.
[11] 国家人体捐献器官获取质量控制中心, 中华医学会器官移植学分会, 中国医师协会器官移植医师分会, 中国医院协会器官获取与分配工作委员会, 中国器官移植发展基金会. 中国器官捐献五年提升计划[J/OL]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 275-277.
[12] 嵇振岭, 陈杰, 唐健雄. 重视复杂腹壁疝手术并发症的预防和处理[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 601-606.
[13] 玉素江·图荪托合提, 韩琦, 麦麦提艾力·麦麦提明, 黄旭东, 王浩, 克力木·阿不都热依木, 艾克拜尔·艾力. 腹腔镜袖状胃切除或联合食管裂孔疝修补术对肥胖症合并胃食管反流病的中期疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 501-506.
[14] 刘见, 杨晓波, 何均健, 等. 应用电钩三孔法腹腔镜袖状胃切除术[J/OL]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(06): 363-364.
[15] 邱英鹏, 李欣雨, 邱海波, 刘松桥, 张凌, 于湘友, 秦秉玉, 蒲莹莹, 赵佳钰, 刘永军, 肖月, 杨毅. 连续性肾脏替代治疗质量控制指标体系的建立及验证[J/OL]. 中华重症医学电子杂志, 2024, 10(04): 351-357.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?