The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Hospital stay of 2 days after open sigmoidectomy with a multimodal rehabilitation programme
Abstract
Background: Hospital stay after colonic surgery is usually between 5 and 10 days, limiting factors being pain, ileus, organ dysfunction and fatigue. Single-modality intervention to reduce these factors with laparoscopic surgery usually requires a hospital stay of 5 days. This paper reports the results of a multimodal rehabilitation regimen after open sigmoidectomy. Methods: Sixteen unselected patients scheduled for elective sigmoid resection (median age 71 years) underwent operation under combined spinal–epidural anaesthesia. After operation, epidural analgesia was continued for 48 h, with immediate oral nutrition and mobilization, and with planned discharge 2 days after surgery. Results: The median postoperative hospital stay was 2 (range 2–6) days (48 h), patients being mobilized for a median of 5 h on the second postoperative day (24–48 h) and for 10 h on the third day (48–72 h). Within 48 h of operation 14 patients had an oral intake of 2000 ml or more and 15 had resumed defaecation. Fatigue and pain scores were low during the first 8–9 days after operation, with a median of 13 h of mobilization per day after discharge. There were no medical or surgical complications during 30 days of follow-up, except for two patients who suffered postspinal headache. Conclusion: Postoperative recovery after open colonic surgery may be accelerated by effective pain relief integrated into an accelerated rehabilitation programme.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Low, D. E., Allum, W., De Manzoni, G., Ferri, L., Immanuel, A., Kuppusamy, M., Law, S., Lindblad, M., Maynard, N., Neal, J., et al. (2019) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-018-4786-4 · Cited by 641
Postoperative ileus: a preventable event
Holte, K., & Kehlet, H. (2000) · Journal of British Surgery · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2168.2000.01595.x · Cited by 593
Self-citationA protocol is not enough to implement an enhanced recovery programme for colorectal resection
Maessen, J., Dejong, C. H. C., Hausel, J., Nygren, J., Lassen, K., Andersen, J., Kessels, A. G. H., Revhaug, A., Kehlet, H., Ljungqvist, O., et al. (2007) · British Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.5468 · Cited by 533
Self-citationEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols: Time to change practice?
Melnyk, M., Casey, R. G., Black, P., & Koupparis, A. J. (2011) · Canadian Urological Association Journal · doi:10.5489/cuaj.11002 · Cited by 384
Efficacy of enhanced recovery programmes for cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Hoogma, D. F., Meeusen, I., Coppens, S., Verbrugghe, P., van den Eynde, J., Engelman, D. T., Grant, M. C., Stoppe, C., & Rex, S. (2025) · British Journal of Anaesthesia · doi:10.1016/j.bja.2025.03.019 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Kehlet, H., & Mogensen, T.
- Venue
- Journal of British Surgery
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1999-02-01
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 227-230
- ISSN
- 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2168
- OpenAlex
- W1939720700
- Cited by
- 577
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.95
- 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: Hospital stay of 2 days after open sigmoidectomy with a multimodal rehabilitation programme. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2168.1999.01023.x
- The paper
- Kehlet, H., & Mogensen, T. (1999). Hospital stay of 2 days after open sigmoidectomy with a multimodal rehabilitation programme. Journal of British Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2168.1999.01023.x
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.