A randomized trial of day-case vs inpatient laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy

Jelena Kisic-Trope; Erik Qvigstad; Karen Ballard

doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.11.014

A randomized trial of day-case vs inpatient laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy

Jelena Kisic-Trope, Erik Qvigstad, Karen Ballard

In: American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2011 · vol. 204(4) , pp. 307.e1–307.e8 · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.11.014 · PMID:21272844 · W1964697405

article OA: closed CC0

View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher

⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-17 ⓘ

Day-case laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy patients were similarly satisfied with hospitalization length as overnight patients, but experienced lower quality of life.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

ObjectiveTo determine whether women having day-case laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy are more or less satisfied with the length of hospital stay compared with women who stayed overnight after the procedure.Study designAn randomized control trial of 49 women randomized to day-case or overnight hospital stay after laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy. Satisfaction with length of hospitalization and quality of life were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test.ResultsNo group differences were found in satisfaction with length of hospital stay (P = .13). There was a nonsignificant trend toward greater anxiety in the day-case group (P = .06 on day 1 postoperative). Quality of life was lower in the day-case group on days 2 (P = .02) and 4 (P = .03), postoperatively.ConclusionWomen having a day-case hysterectomy were discharged after median of 5 hours postoperative and were similarly satisfied as women hospitalized overnight. Quality of life, however, does appear to be compromised by day-case surgery.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

References (18)

doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2004.09.014 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2006.01.010 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2005.01.009 via openalex
doi:10.3109/9780203490983 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60149-1 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2005.06.015 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s1074-3804(05)80983-1 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s1701-2163(16)32258-7 via openalex
W2407290273 via openalex
W6654770560 via openalex
W6713883126 via openalex
doi:10.1080/01443619866813 via openalex
doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01269.x via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2004.12.022 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s1089-9472(03)00181-3 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60051-5 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2005.03.013 via openalex
doi:10.1007/s00464-007-9255-3 via openalex

Source provenance

openalex: last seen: 2026-05-11T05:56:47.744056+00:00

License: CC0 · commercial use OK

[1] doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2004.09.014 via openalex

[2] doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2006.01.010 via openalex

[3] doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2005.01.009 via openalex

[4] doi:10.3109/9780203490983 via openalex

[5] doi:10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60149-1 via openalex

[6] doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2005.06.015 via openalex

[7] doi:10.1016/s1074-3804(05)80983-1 via openalex

[8] doi:10.1016/s1701-2163(16)32258-7 via openalex

[9] W2407290273 via openalex

[10] W6654770560 via openalex

[11] W6713883126 via openalex

[12] doi:10.1080/01443619866813 via openalex

[13] doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01269.x via openalex

[14] doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2004.12.022 via openalex

[15] doi:10.1016/s1089-9472(03)00181-3 via openalex

[16] doi:10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60051-5 via openalex

[17] doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2005.03.013 via openalex

[18] doi:10.1007/s00464-007-9255-3 via openalex