Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Fatigue and physical function after hysterectomy measured by SF-36, ergometer, and dynamometer

  • General Gynecology
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Information is limited on the early postoperative rehabilitation following hysterectomy. Our purpose was to evaluate the different perioperative modalities of fatigue, pain, quality of life, and physical performance and their time-related.

Methods

A prospective, follow-up study of a cohort of women undergoing abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy at the Gynecology Department at Herning Hospital, Denmark. Data from 108 women with elective hysterectomy were compared pre- and postoperatively. The fatigue level was scored on a visual analogue scale and SF-36. Objective measurements were performed by dynamometer of hand grip, knee extension strength, and postural stability; further, by ergometer cycle work capacity and by impedance lean body mass. Quality of life was assessed using the SF-36 questionnaire. Patients were examined preoperatively and twice postoperatively.

Results

Women lost lean body mass 13 and 30 days after their hysterectomy (p < 0.01). Strength in hand (p < 0.05) and knees (p < 0.01) increased compared to preoperative values but no change in postural stability and work capacity was noted. Fatigue resumed to preoperative levels after 30 days. SF-36 revealed that the modality of ‘physical functioning’ and ‘role limitations due to physical problems’ remained significantly decreased at the end of the study (p < 0.01)

Conclusion

Hysterectomy was associated with reduction in physical function assessed by SF-36 30 days after surgery. No impairment of performance was found in physical tests at days 13 and 30 postoperatively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Christensen T, Kehlet H (1993) Postoperative fatigue. World J Surg 17:220–225

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jensen MB, Houborg KB, Norager CB, Henriksen MG, Laurberg S (2011) Postoperative changes in fatigue, physical function and body composition: an analysis of the amalgamated data from five randomized trials on patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis 13:588–593

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Christensen T, Bendix T, Kehlet H (1982) Fatigue and cardiorespiratory function following abdominal surgery. Br J Surg 69:417–419

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Edwards H, Rose EA, King TC (1982) Postoperative deterioration in muscular function. Arch Surg 117:899–901

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wilmore DW (2002) From Cuthbertson to fast-track surgery: 70 years of progress in reducing stress in surgical patients. Ann Surg 236:643–648

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Jensen MB, Kissmeyer-Nielsen P, Laurberg S (1998) Perioperative growth hormone treatment increases nitrogen and fluid balance and results in short-term and long-term conservation of lean tissue mass. Am J Clin Nutr 68:840–846

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kissmeyer-Nielsen P, Jensen MB, Laurberg S (1999) Perioperative growth hormone treatment and functional outcome after major abdominal surgery: a randomized, double-blind, controlled study. Ann Surg 229:298–302

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Houborg KB, Jensen MB, Hessov I, Laurberg S (2005) Little effect of physical training on body composition and nutritional intake following colorectal surgery-a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Eur J Clin Nutr 59:969–977

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Houborg KB, Jensen MB, Rasmussen P, Gandrup P, Schroll M, Laurberg S (2006) Postoperative physical training following colorectal surgery: a randomised, placebo-controlled study. Scand J Surg 95:17–22

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Norager CB, Jensen MB, Madsen MR, Qvist N, Laurberg S (2006) Effect of darbepoetin alfa on physical function in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Oncology 71:212–220

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Liu SS, Carpenter RL, Mackey DC et al (1995) Effects of perioperative analgesic technique on rate of recovery after colon surgery. Anesthesiology 83:757–765

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kehlet H (1996) Effect of pain relief on the surgical stress response. Reg Anesth 21(6 Suppl):35–37

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. DeCherney AH, Bachmann G, Isaacson K, Gall S (2002) Postoperative fatigue negatively impacts the daily lives of patients recovering from hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 99:51–57

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rock JA (2001) Quality-of-life assessment in gynecologic surgery. J Reprod Med 46(Suppl):515–519

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jensen MB, Nørager CB, Sommer T, Madsen MR, Laurberg S (2014) Changes in fatigue and physical function following laparoscopic colonic surgery. Polski Prz Chir 86:82–88

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rasmussen KL, Neumann G, Ljungström B, Hansen V, Lauszus FF (2004) The influence of body mass index on the prevalence of complications after hysterectomy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 83:85–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Neumann GA, Lauszus FF, Ljungstrøm B, Rasmussen KL (2007) Incidence and remission of urinary incontinence after hysterectomy—a 3-year follow-up study. Int Urogyn J 18:379–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Johansen P, Al-Khafagi SK, Thøstesen LM, Lauszus FF, Rasmussen KL (2008) Analysis of need for sick leave after hysterectomy. Ugeskr Laeger 170(17):1465–1468 (Article in Danish)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jensen MB, Hermann AP, Hessov I, Mosekilde L (1997) Components of variance when assessing the reproducibility of body composition measurements using bio-impedance and the Hologic QDR-2000 DXA scanner. Clin Nutr 16:61–65

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Heitmann BL (1990) Prediction of body water and fat in adult Danes from measurement of electrical impedance. A validation study. Int J Obes 14:789–802

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30:473–483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bjorner JB, Damsgaard MT, Watt T, Groenvold M (1998) Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability of the Danish SF-36. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1001–1011

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bjørner JB (1997) [Danish manual on SF-36] Dansk manual til SF-36. Et spørgeskema om helbredsstatus, Lif Lægemiddelindustriforeningen. ISBN 87-90350-07-3

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wodlin NB, Nilsson L, Carlsson P, Kjølhede P (2011) Cost-effectiveness of general anesthesia vs spinal anesthesia in fast-track abdominal benign hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205:326. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2011.05.043

    Google Scholar 

  25. Munro MG, Dickersin K, Clark MA, Langenberg P, Scherer RW, Frick KD (2011) The surgical treatments outcomes project for dysfunctional uterine bleeding: summary of an agency for health research and quality-sponsored randomized trial of endometrial ablation versus hysterectomy for women with heavy menstrual bleeding. Menopause 18:445–452. doi:10.1097/gme.0b013e31820786f1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Brandsborg B, Nikolajsen L, Hansen CT, Kehlet H, Jensen TS (2007) Risk factors for chronic pain after hysterectomy: a nationwide questionnaire and database study. Anesthesiology 106:1003–1012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Cochrane Collaboration homepage, Chapter 5.4. http://handbook.cochrane.org/. Accessed 17 Nov 2015

  28. Humalajärvi N, Aukee P, Kairaluoma MV et al (2014) Quality of life and pelvic floor dysfunction symptoms after hysterectomy with or without pelvic organ prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 182:16–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Reitsma ML, Vandenkerkhof EG, Johnston SL, Hopman WM (2011) Does health-related quality of life improve in women following gynaecological surgery? J Obstet Gynaecol Can 33:1241–1247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kehlet H, Wilmore DW (2008) Evidence-based surgical care and the evolution of fast-track surgery. Ann Surg 248:189–198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Vlug MS, Wind J, van der Zaag E, Ubbink DT, Cense HA, Bemelman WA (2009) Systematic review of laparoscopic vs open colonic surgery within an enhanced recovery programme. Colorectal Dis 11:335–343

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Li MZ, Xiao LB, Wu WH, Yang SB, Li SZ (2012) Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery within fast-track perioperative care. Dis Colon Rectum 55:821–827

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Einarsson JI, Suzuki Y, Vellinga TT et al (2011) Prospective evaluation of quality of life in total versus supracervical laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 18:617–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Andersen L, Zobbe V, Ottesen B, Gluud C, Tabor A, Gimbel H, Danish Hysterectomy Trial Group (2014) Five-year follow up of a randomised controlled trial comparing subtotal with total abdominal hysterectomy. BJOG 122:851–857

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Susie Lindhardt Larsen, R.N., contributed substantially in keeping the flow and logistics of patients on track.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gynaecology Department, Herning Hospital, Gl. Landevej 61, 7400, Herning, Denmark

    Finn F. Lauszus & Ervin Kallfa

  2. Surgical Research Unit, Department of Surgery, Herning Hospital, Gl. Landevej 61, 7400, Herning, Denmark

    Mogens R. Madsen

Authors
  1. Finn F. Lauszus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ervin Kallfa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mogens R. Madsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Finn F. Lauszus.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Financial support

The study did not receive any external financial support.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lauszus, F.F., Kallfa, E. & Madsen, M.R. Fatigue and physical function after hysterectomy measured by SF-36, ergometer, and dynamometer. Arch Gynecol Obstet 294, 95–101 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3999-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3999-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation