Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 492

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial Between a Pathway of Controlled Rehabilitation With Early Ambulation and Diet and Traditional Postoperative Care After Laparotomy and Intestinal Resection

Delaney, Conor P., Zutshi, Massarat, Senagore, Anthony J., Remzi, Feza H., Hammel, Jeffrey, Fazio, Victor W.·2003·Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In an era of dwindling hospital resources and increasing medical costs, safe reduction in postoperative stay has become a major focus to optimize utilization of healthcare resources. Although several protocols have been reported to reduce postoperative stay, no Level I evidence exists for their use in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Sixty-four patients undergoing laparotomy and intestinal or rectal resection were randomly assigned to a pathway of controlled rehabilitation with early ambulation and diet or to traditional postoperative care. Time to discharge from hospital, complication and readmission rates, pain level, quality of life, and patient satisfaction scores were determined at the time of discharge and at 10 and 30 days after surgery. Subgroups were defined to evaluate those who derived the optimal benefit from the protocol. RESULTS: Pathway patients spent less total time in the hospital after surgery (5.4 vs. 7.1 days; P = 0.02) and less time in the hospital during the primary admission than traditional patients. Patients younger than 70 years old had greater benefits than the overall study group (5 vs. 7.1 days; P = 0.01). Patients treated by surgeons with the most experience with the pathway spent significantly less time in the hospital than did those whose surgeons were less experienced with the pathway (P = 0.01). There was no difference between pathway and traditional patients for readmission or complication rates, pain score, quality of life after surgery, or overall satisfaction with the hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Patients scheduled for a laparotomy and major intestinal or rectal resection are suitable for management by a pathway of controlled rehabilitation with early ambulation and diet. Pathway patients have a shorter hospital stay, with no adverse effect on patient satisfaction, pain scores, or complication rates. Patients younger than 70 years of age derive the optimal benefit, and increased surgeon experience improves outcome.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10350-004-6672-4

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 492

Metadata

Authors
Delaney, C. P., Zutshi, M., Senagore, A. J., Remzi, F. H., Hammel, J., & Fazio, V. W.
Venue
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
Published
2003-07
Volume
46
Issue
7
Pages
851-859
ISSN
0012-3706 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2036515306
Cited by
492
References
1
FWCI
16.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial Between a Pathway of Controlled Rehabilitation With Early Ambulation and Diet and Traditional Postoperative Care After Laparotomy and Intestinal Resection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10350-004-6672-4
The paper
Delaney, C. P., Zutshi, M., Senagore, A. J., Remzi, F. H., Hammel, J., & Fazio, V. W. (2003). Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial Between a Pathway of Controlled Rehabilitation With Early Ambulation and Diet and Traditional Postoperative Care After Laparotomy and Intestinal Resection. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-6672-4

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.