Plain English summary
Introduction
Materials and methods
Study design
Search strategy
Identifying relevant papers
Data extraction and analysis
Quality assessment
Results
Study demographics
First author, date, country | Surgery/surgical condition | Intervention (number of participants) | Comparator (number of participants) | Primary outcome | HRQoL tool/s used | Baseline HRQoL assessed | Timepoints HRQoL assessed | Findings | Risk of bias |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
van der Wal, 2011, Netherlands [17] | Hartmann’s procedure | Mechanical anti-adhesion barrier (n = 16) | Usual care (n = 19) | Incidence of abdominal complaints | SF-36a EQ-5Db | No | 11–13 years after participation | No difference in HRQol between groups | Some concerns |
van Hooft, 2011, Netherlands [13] | Acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction | Colonic stenting (n = 47) | Emergency surgery (n = 51) | Mean global health status | EORTC QLQ-C30c | Yes | 4, 12 and 24 weeks after inclusion | No difference in health status between groups** | Low |
Rosenmuller*, 2013, Sweden [18] | Cholecystectomy (30% acute) | Small incision open procedure (n = 172) | Laparoscopic procedure (n = 183) | Costs and quality of life | EQ-5D | Yes | 3, 7, 11 and 30 days after surgery | Quality of life significantly lower in open group | Some concerns |
Kapma, 2014, Netherlands [19] | Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm | Endovascular repair (n = 57) | Open repair (n = 59) | Cost-effectiveness | SF-36 EQ-5D | No | 30 days, 3 months and 6 months after surgery | No difference in HRQol between groups | Low |
Schultz*, 2015, Norway and Sweden [20] | Acute perforated diverticulitis | Laparoscopic lavage (n = 101) | Primary colonic resection (n = 98) | Major complications | Cleveland QOL instrument | No | 90 days after surgery | No difference in HRQol between groups | Low |
Thornell, 2016, Sweden and Denmark [21] | Perforated diverticulitis | Laparoscopic lavage (n = 43) | Hartmann’s procedure (n = 40) | Reoperation rate within 1 year | SF-36 EQ-5D | No | At discharge, and 6 and 12 months after discharge | No difference in HRQol between groups | Low |
Rosenmuller*, 2017, Sweden [22] | Cholecystectomy (30% acute) | Small incision open procedure (n = 151) | Laparoscopic procedure (n = 172) | Costs and quality of life | EQ-5D | Yes | 3, 7, 11 and 30 days and 12 months after surgery | No difference in HRQol between groups | Low |
Schultz*, 2017, Norway and Sweden [23] | Acute perforated diverticulitis | Laparoscopic lavage (n = 101) | Primary colonic resection (n = 98) | Major complications | Cleveland QOL instrument | No | 1 year after surgery | No difference in HRQol between groups | Low |
Yang, 2019, United Kingdom [11] | Emergency abdominal surgery | Perioperative quality improvement programme (n = 7,374) | Usual care (n = 8,482) | Cost-effectiveness | EQ-5D | Yes | 90 and 180 days after surgery | No difference in HRQol between groups | Low |
Hollemans, 2019, Netherlands [24] | Infected necrotizing pancreatitis | Step-up approach (n = 30) | Primary open necrosectomy (n = 36) | Composite of death or major complications | SF-36 EQ-5D | No | 3, 6, and 12 months, and 5 years after discharge | No difference in HRQol between groups | Low |
Harji, 2020, United Kingdom [12] | Emergency abdominal surgery | Laparoscopic surgery (n = 33) | Open surgery (n = 31) | Feasibility | SF-12d EQ-5D GIQLIe | Yes | 3, 7 and 30 days, and 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery | Data compliance reduced over time | Low |