Journal of reconstructive microsurgery | 2021

Do Patient Expectations of Discharge Affect Length of Stay after Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap for Breast Reconstruction?

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Abstract


INTRODUCTION\n\u2003Deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is a common method of breast reconstruction. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) postoperative protocols have been used to optimize patient outcomes and facilitate shorter hospital stays. The effect of patient expectations on length of stay (LOS) after DIEP has not been evaluated. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether patient expectations affect LOS.\n\n\nMETHODS\n\u2003A retrospective chart review was performed for patients undergoing DIEP flaps for breast reconstruction from 2017 to 2020. All patients were managed with the same ERAS protocol. Patients were divided in Group I (early expectations) and Group II (standard expectations). Group I patients had expectations set for discharge postoperative day (POD) 2 for unilateral DIEP and POD 3 for bilateral DIEP. Group II patients were given expectations for POD 3 to 4 for unilateral DIEP and POD 4 to 5 for bilateral. The primary outcome variable was LOS.\n\n\nRESULTS\n\u2003The study included 215 DIEP flaps (45 unilateral and 85 bilateral). The average age was 49.8 years old, and the average body mass index (BMI) was 31.4. Group I (early expectations) included 56 patients (24 unilateral DIEPs, 32 bilateral). Group II (standard expectations) had 74 patients (21 unilateral, 53 bilateral). LOS for unilateral DIEP was 2.9 days for Group I compared with 3.7 days for Group II (p\u2009=\u20090.004). Group I bilateral DIEP patients had LOS of 3.5 days compared with 3.9 days for Group II (p\u2009=\u20090.02). Immediate timing of DIEP (Group I 42.9 vs. Group II 52.7%) and BMI (Group I 32.1 vs. Group II 30.8) were similar (p\u2009=\u20090.25).\n\n\nCONCLUSION\n\u2003Our study found significantly shorter hospital stay after DIEP flap for patients who expected an earlier discharge date despite similar patient characteristics and uniform ERAS protocol. Patient expectations should be considered during patient counseling and as a confounding variable when analyzing ERAS protocols.

Volume None
Pages None
DOI 10.1055/s-0041-1727201
Language English
Journal Journal of reconstructive microsurgery

Full Text