Cross Sectional Analysis of Patient Outcomes Following Emergency Versus Elective Hernia Repair
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Emergency or routine hernia repair procedures are prevalent. Surgery problems, recovery, and hospital stays vary. These variations must be understood to improve patient care and hernia surgery alternatives. Our study will compare elective and emergency hernia procedures to determine their effects on patient recovery and healthcare resource consumption.
Methods: A cross-sectional investigation at Patna Medical College and Hospital included 100 elective or emergency hernia repair patients for One year. Patient demographics, surgery issues, recovery time, hospital stay, and recurrence rates were recorded. Both groups' findings were compared using chi-square and independent t-tests.
Results: Emergency hernia repairs (n=25) had 32% complications compared to 12% for elective repairs (p=0.045). Emergency cases had 16% wound infections vs. 4% (p=0.032). The emergency group had lengthier hospital stays (4.3 days vs. 2.1 days, p<0.001) and recovery durations (6.8 days) compared to elective repairs (4.5 days, p<0.001). Emergency and elective repairs made up 8% and 4% of recurrences, respectively (p=0.312).
Conclusion: This study suggests that timely intervention and preoperative preparation reduce risks and improve patient outcomes after emergency hernia repairs. Elective operations reduce complications, recuperation time, and hospital stays. These findings support elective hernia repairs being clinically beneficial and prioritising planned treatments whenever possible to maximise patient care and healthcare resource allocation.