Postoperative Activity Restrictions After Slings: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Pub Date : 2024-05-06 DOI:10.1097/SPV.0000000000001515
Erica Lai, Katherine McDonald, Vini Chopra, Lindsay Robinson, Alejandro Alvarez, Danielle O'Shaughnessy, Nirmala Pillalamarri, Allison Polland, Dara Shalom, Harvey Winkler
{"title":"Postoperative Activity Restrictions After Slings: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Erica Lai, Katherine McDonald, Vini Chopra, Lindsay Robinson, Alejandro Alvarez, Danielle O'Shaughnessy, Nirmala Pillalamarri, Allison Polland, Dara Shalom, Harvey Winkler","doi":"10.1097/SPV.0000000000001515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Restricting activity after midurethral slings is an unproven practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of postoperative activity restriction on satisfaction and outcomes after slings.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>This was a multicenter, 2-arm, noninferiority randomized controlled trial. Patients aged 18-85 years undergoing treatment with a midurethral sling were randomized 1:1 to postoperative activity restriction or liberal activity. Restrictions included avoidance of strenuous exercise and heavy lifting. The liberal group was allowed to resume activity at their discretion. Our primary outcome was satisfaction with postoperative instruction at 2 weeks. Secondary outcomes included surgical failure, mesh exposure rates, and other adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 158 patients were randomized with 80 to the liberal group and 78 to the restricted group. At 2 weeks, 54 (80.6%) of patients in the liberal group and 48 (73.9%) of patients in the restricted group were satisfied. We found statistical evidence supporting the hypothesis that postoperative liberal activity instruction is noninferior to activity restriction with regard to patient satisfaction (P = 0.0281). There was no significant difference in strenuous activity at 2 weeks (P = 0.0824). The liberal group reported significantly more moderate activity at 2 weeks (P = 0.0384) and more strenuous activity at 6 weeks and 6 months (P = 0.0171, P = 0.0118, respectively). The rate of recurrent or persistent stress incontinence for liberal versus restricted groups was 18.52% versus 23.53% (P = 0.635). There were no statistically significant differences in complication rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Postoperative liberal activity was noninferior to activity restriction with regard to patients' satisfaction. There was no evidence supporting a statistically significant association between postoperative instruction and negative surgical outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000001515","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Restricting activity after midurethral slings is an unproven practice.

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of postoperative activity restriction on satisfaction and outcomes after slings.

Study design: This was a multicenter, 2-arm, noninferiority randomized controlled trial. Patients aged 18-85 years undergoing treatment with a midurethral sling were randomized 1:1 to postoperative activity restriction or liberal activity. Restrictions included avoidance of strenuous exercise and heavy lifting. The liberal group was allowed to resume activity at their discretion. Our primary outcome was satisfaction with postoperative instruction at 2 weeks. Secondary outcomes included surgical failure, mesh exposure rates, and other adverse events.

Results: In total, 158 patients were randomized with 80 to the liberal group and 78 to the restricted group. At 2 weeks, 54 (80.6%) of patients in the liberal group and 48 (73.9%) of patients in the restricted group were satisfied. We found statistical evidence supporting the hypothesis that postoperative liberal activity instruction is noninferior to activity restriction with regard to patient satisfaction (P = 0.0281). There was no significant difference in strenuous activity at 2 weeks (P = 0.0824). The liberal group reported significantly more moderate activity at 2 weeks (P = 0.0384) and more strenuous activity at 6 weeks and 6 months (P = 0.0171, P = 0.0118, respectively). The rate of recurrent or persistent stress incontinence for liberal versus restricted groups was 18.52% versus 23.53% (P = 0.635). There were no statistically significant differences in complication rates.

Conclusions: Postoperative liberal activity was noninferior to activity restriction with regard to patients' satisfaction. There was no evidence supporting a statistically significant association between postoperative instruction and negative surgical outcomes.

分享
查看原文
吊带术后活动限制:随机对照试验
重要性:尿道中段吊带术后限制活动是一种未经证实的做法:本研究旨在评估术后活动限制对中段尿道吊带术后满意度和效果的影响:这是一项多中心、双臂、非劣效随机对照试验。接受尿道中段吊带治疗的 18-85 岁患者按 1:1 随机分配到术后活动限制或自由活动。限制活动包括避免剧烈运动和提重物。自由活动组可自行决定恢复活动。我们的主要结果是两周后对术后指导的满意度。次要结果包括手术失败、网片暴露率和其他不良事件:共有 158 名患者被随机分配到自由组和限制组,其中自由组 80 人,限制组 78 人。两周后,54 名(80.6%)自由组患者和 48 名(73.9%)限制组患者表示满意。我们发现有统计学证据支持这样的假设,即就患者满意度而言,术后自由活动指导并不优于限制活动指导(P = 0.0281)。两周后,剧烈活动方面没有明显差异(P = 0.0824)。自由组在 2 周时的中度活动明显增多(P = 0.0384),在 6 周和 6 个月时的剧烈活动明显增多(分别为 P = 0.0171 和 P = 0.0118)。自由组和限制组的复发性或持续性压力性尿失禁发生率分别为 18.52% 和 23.53%(P = 0.635)。并发症发生率无统计学差异:结论:就患者满意度而言,术后自由活动并不比限制活动差。没有证据表明术后指导与手术不良后果之间存在统计学意义上的显著关联。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信