SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2025
Effects of enhanced recovery after surgery nursing on patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to systematically evaluate the effects of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) nursing protocols on patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy.
methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies investigating the impact of ERAS nursing on laparoscopic colectomy patients were retrieved from databases including CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, CBM, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science, with a search period spanning from inception to April 1, 2025. The quality of the included studies was assessed using appropriate tools; while the overall quality was acceptable, some studies had a higher risk of bias. Data were statistically analyzed using RevMan 5.3 software.
resultsA total of 7 RCTs and 7 quasi-experimental studies involving 1991 patients were included. The meta-analysis demonstrated that the ERAS nursing group exhibited significantly shorter hospital stays (SMD = -0.95, 95% CI: -1.64 to -0.25, P = 0.007), lower complication rates (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.40-0.64, P < 0.00001), and earlier first flatus time (SMD = -1.05, 95% CI: -1.56 to -0.54, P < 0.0001) compared to the control group. High heterogeneity (I² >75%) was observed for both hospital stay and time to first flatus. However, no statistically significant difference was observed in readmission rates between the two groups (OR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.56-1.81, P = 0.97).
conclusionERAS nursing significantly shortens hospital stay, reduces the incidence of postoperative complications, and promotes the recovery of gastrointestinal function (earlier time to first flatus). However, due to the high heterogeneity and varying quality of the included studies and the relatively low quality of some studies, its effect on reducing readmission rates has not been definitively established. Therefore, further research is needed to minimize bias and enhance the reliability of the data.
trial registrationThe study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (Registration ID: CRD420251165792).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.