ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2025
Clinical efficacy of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery in intervening patients with ureteral calculi complicated with infection and its impact on quality of life.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of ERAS (enhanced recovery after surgery) in intervening patients with ureteral calculi complicated with infection and its impact on quality of life. Methodology: This prospective study included 120 ureteral calculi patients with infection admitted to Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University from September 2023 to December 2024. They were randomly divided into control and experimental groups (60 cases each). The control group received standard perioperative care, while the experimental group received ERAS in addition. The groups were compared for emotional status, clinical outcomes (calculus clearance, complications like hemorrhage, infection and abdominal effusion), recovery, quality of life and satisfaction. Results: The experimental group showed significantly lower the Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and the Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) scores than the control group post-intervention (P=0.00). Their calculus clearance rate was higher (P=0.03), while complication rates were lower (P=0.02). Postoperative recovery times (nephrostomy tube retention, diet recovery, first exsufflation, ambulation and hospitalization) were significantly shorter (P=0.00). The experimental group also had better KPS and SF-36 scores (P=0.00) and higher satisfaction (100% vs. 88%, P=0.00). Conclusion: ERAS is a safe, effective approach that reduces negative emotions and complications, improves calculus clearance, enhances quality of life, boosts satisfaction and accelerates recovery.
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.