The Impact of the Implementation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Program in an Entire Health System: A Natural Experiment in Alberta, Canada

Adapting the World Health Organization's Surgical Safety Checklist to High-Income Settings: A Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Trial Protocol

Objectives

The proposed study aims to assess users' perceptions of a surgical safety checklist (SSC) reimplementation toolkit and its impact on SSC attitudes and operating room (OR) culture, meaningful checklist use, measures of surgical safety, and OR efficiency at 3 different hospital sites.

Background

The High-Performance Checklist toolkit (toolkit) assists surgical teams in modifying and implementing or reimplementing the World Health Organization's SSC. Through the explore, prepare, implement, and sustain implementation framework, the toolkit provides a process and set of tools to facilitate surgical teams' modification, implementation, training on, and evaluation of the SSC.

Methods

A pre-post intervention design will be used to assess the impact of the modified SSC on surgical processes, team culture, patient experience, and safety. This mixed-methods study includes quantitative and qualitative data derived from surveys, semi-structured interviews, patient focus groups, and SSC performance observations. Additionally, patient outcome and OR efficiency data will be collected from the study sites' health surveillance systems.

Data analysis

Statistical data will be analyzed using Statistical Product and Service Solutions, while qualitative data will be analyzed thematically using NVivo. Furthermore, interview data will be analyzed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance implementation frameworks.

Setting

The toolkit will be introduced at 3 diverse surgical sites in Alberta, Canada: an urban hospital, university hospital, and small regional hospital.

Anticipated impact

We anticipate the results of this study will optimize SSC usage at the participating surgical sites, help shape and refine the toolkit, and improve its usability and application at future sites.

Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for colorectal cancer in a regional hospital network supported by audit and feedback: a stepped wedge, cluster randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are known to potentially improve the management and outcomes of patients undergoing colorectal surgery, with limited evidence of their implementation in hospital networks and in a large population. We aimed to assess the impact of the implementation of an ERAS protocol in colorectal cancer surgery in the entire region of Piemonte, Italy, supported by an audit and feedback (A&F) intervention.

METHODS

A large, stepped wedge, cluster randomised trial enrolled patients scheduled for elective surgery at 29 general surgery units (clusters). At baseline (first 3 months), standard care was continued in all units. Thereafter, four groups of clusters began to adopt the ERAS protocol successively. By the end of the study, each cluster had a period in which standard care was maintained (control) and a period in which the protocol was applied (experimental). ERAS implementation was supported by initial training and A&F initiatives. The primary endpoint was length of stay (LOS) without outliers (>94th percentile), and the secondary endpoints were outliers for LOS, postoperative medical and surgical complications, quality of recovery and compliance with ERAS items.

RESULTS

Of 2626 randomised patients, 2397 were included in the LOS analysis (1060 in the control period and 1337 in the experimental period). The mean LOS without outliers was 8.5 days during the control period (SD 3.9) and 7.5 (SD 3.5) during the experimental one. The adjusted difference between the two periods was a reduction of -0.58 days (95% CI -1.07, -0.09; p=0.021). The compliance with ERAS items increased from 52.4% to 67.3% (estimated absolute difference +13%; 95% CI 11.4%, 14.7%). No difference in the occurrence of complications was evidenced (OR 1.22; 95% CI 0.89, 1.68).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of the ERAS protocol for colorectal cancer, supported by A&F approach, led to a substantial improvement in compliance and a reduction in LOS, without meaningful effects on complications. Trial registration number NCT04037787.

Effect of Pharmacoprophylaxis on Postoperative Outcomes in Adult Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Multi-Center Retrospective Cohort Study within an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Framework

BACKGROUND

The application of enhanced recovery after surgery principles decreases postoperative complications (POCs), length of stay (LOS), and readmissions. Pharmacoprophylaxis decreases morbidity, but the effect of specific regimens on clinical outcomes is unclear.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Records of 476 randomly selected adult patients who underwent elective colorectal surgeries (ECRS) at 10 US hospitals were abstracted. Primary outcomes were surgical site infection (SSI), venous thromboembolism (VTE), postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), pain, and ileus rates. Secondary outcomes included LOS and 7- and 30-day readmission rates.

RESULTS

POC rates were SSI (3.4%), VTE (1.5%), PONV (47.9%), pain (58.1%), and ileus (16.1%). Cefazolin 2 g/metronidazole 500 mg and ertapenem 1 g were associated with the shortest LOS; cefotetan 2 g and cefoxitin 2 g with the longest LOS. No SSI occurred with ertapenem and cefotetan. More Caucasians than Blacks received oral antibiotics before intravenous antibiotics without impact. Enoxaparin 40 mg subcutaneously daily was the most common inpatient and discharge VTE prophylaxis. All in-hospital VTEs occurred with unfractionated heparin. Most received rescue rather than around-the-clock antiemetics. Scopolamine patches, spinal opioids, and IV lidocaine continuous infusion were associated with lower PONV. Transversus abdominis plane block with long-acting local anesthetics, celecoxib, non-anesthetic ketamine bolus, ketorolac IV, lidocaine IV, and pregabalin were associated with lower in-hospital pain severity rates. Gabapentinoids and alvimopan were associated with lower ileus rates. Acetaminophen, alvimopan, famotidine, and lidocaine patches were associated with shorter LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant differences in pharmacotherapy regimens that may improve primary and secondary outcomes in ECRS were identified. In adult ECRS, cefotetan or ertapenem may be better regimens for preventing in-hospital SSI, while ertapenem or C/M may lead to shorter LOS. The value of OA to prevent SSI was not demonstrated. Inpatient enoxaparin, compared to UFH, may reduce VTE rates with a similar LOS. A minority of patients had a documented PONV risk assessment, and a majority used as-needed rather than around-the-clock strategies. Preoperative scopolamine patches continued postoperatively may lower PONV and PDNV severity and shorter LOS. Alvimopan may reduce ileus and shorten LOS. Anesthesia that includes TAP block, ketorolac IV, and pregabalin use may lead to reduced pain rates. Acetaminophen, alvimopan, famotidine, and lidocaine patches may shorten LOS. Given the challenges of pain management and the incidence of PONV/PDNV found in this study, additional studies should be conducted to determine optimal opioid-free anesthesia and the benefit of newer antiemetics on patient outcomes. Moreover, future research should identify latent pharmacotherapy variables that impact patient outcomes, correlate pertinent laboratory results, and examine the impact of order or care sets used for ECRS at study hospitals.

Principles of enhanced recovery in gastrointestinal surgery

BACKGROUND

To reduce the impact of surgery-related stress, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have been developed since over 15 years with subsequent improved postoperative outcome. This multimodal and evidence-based perioperative approach has spread to all fields of gastrointestinal surgery, from esophagus, stomach, duodenum and pancreas, liver, small intestine and colon, and rectum, as well as for other specialties like vascular and cardia surgeries or neurosurgery, among others.

PURPOSE

The aim of this state-of-the-art article is to assess current state of evidence on perioperative management specifically in gastrointestinal surgery, with a focus on surgery-related aspects, outcome benefit, and future directions.

CONCLUSION

The surgical team must promote continuous improvement of the patient's ERAS compliance to ensure optimal perioperative care. Everyday clinical practice should be performed according to latest evidence-based medicine and challenging surgical dogma. Moreover, the surgeon must lead and support a multidisciplinary and collaborative teamwork tailored to patient's need especially with anesthetists and nursing staff.

[Structured Implementation of a Fast-Track Program - How Does it Work?]

Fast-track or ERAS programs can give clinically relevant benefits for patients undergoing surgery. They also have financial advantages for the hospital. Despite these facts, fast-track has been implemented in only very few hospitals in Germany. Neither scientific evidence nor reimbursement regulations explain this lack of fast-track acceptance. It seems however that a structured process of change from traditional perioperative medicine to evidence based fast-track therapy is missing in Germany. In other countries, structured programs for fast-track or ERAS implementation have been successful in many hospitals. This article describes structured fast-track implementation divided into three consecutive steps: organisational preparation, clinical implementation and continuous examination of fast-track adherence, functional recovery, morbidity and postoperative length of hospital stay. Due to its complex nature, fast-track implementation should be guided by external fast-track experts.

Enhanced recovery after abdominal wall reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) are evidence-based protocols associated with improved patient outcomes. The use of ERAS pathways is well documented in various surgical specialties. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of ERAS protocols in patients undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR).

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis were reported according to PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. The databases PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched for original studies comparing ERAS with standard care in patients undergoing AWR. The primary outcome was length of stay (LOS) and secondary outcomes were readmission and surgical site infection (SSI) and/or surgical site occurrences (SSO).

RESULTS

Five studies were included in the meta-analysis. All were retrospective cohort studies including 453 patients treated according to ERAS protocols, and 494 patients treated according to standard care. The meta-analysis demonstrated that patients undergoing AWR managed with ERAS had a mean 0.89 days reduction in LOS compared with patients treated with standard care (95% CI - 1.70 to - 0.07 days, p = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in readmission rate (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.87, p = 1.00) or SSI/SSO (OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.11, p = 0.56) between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of ERAS in patients undergoing AWR was found to significantly reduce LOS without increasing the readmission rate or SSI/SSO. Based on the existing literature, ERAS protocols should be implemented for patients undergoing AWR.

Associations Between Perioperative Crystalloid Volume and Adverse Outcomes in Five Surgical Populations

BACKGROUND

Optimal administration of fluids is an important part of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols. We sought to examine the relationship between perioperative crystalloid volume and adverse outcomes in five common types of surgical procedures with ERAS fluid guidelines in place where large randomized controlled trials have not been conducted: breast reconstruction, bariatric, major urologic, gynoncologic, and head and neck oncologic procedures.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients who had undergone any one of the aforementioned procedures within any facility in a large multihospital alliance (Premier, Inc, Charlotte, NC) between 2008 and 2014. We used multivariable generalized additive models to examine relationships between the total crystalloid volume (TCV) on the day of surgery and a composite adverse outcome of prolonged (>75th percentile) hospital or intensive care unit stay or in-hospital mortality. Models were constructed separately within each surgical category and adjusted for demographic, clinical, and hospital characteristics. Informed consent requirements were waived because deidentified data were used.

RESULTS

We identified 83,685 patients within 312 US hospitals undergoing breast reconstruction (n = 8738), bariatric surgery (n = 8067), major urologic surgery (n = 28,654), gynoncologic surgery (n = 34,559), and head/neck oncology surgery (n = 3667). There was significant patient-independent variation in TCV. Probabilities of adverse outcomes increased at a TCV below 3 L and above 6 L for all types of surgeries except bariatric surgery, where larger volumes were associated with progressively better outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Relationships between TCV and adverse outcomes were generally J shaped with higher volumes (>6 L) associated with increased risk. As per current ERAS guidelines, it is important to avoid excessive crystalloid volume in most surgical procedures except for bariatric surgery.

Comparison of the effects of an ERAS program and a single-port laparoscopic surgery on postoperative outcomes of colon cancer patients

Advancement of the surgical modality and perioperative care are the two main dimensions for the modern improvement of surgical outcome. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the two by using the data from the single-port laparoscopic surgery and the early recovery after surgery (ERAS) program. Patients who underwent elective surgery for primary adenocarcinoma of the colon were divided into three groups and compared: ERAS (multi-port laparoscopic surgery with ERAS perioperative care), Conventional-SILS (single-port surgery with conventional perioperative care), or Conventional-Multi (multi-port laparoscopic surgery with conventional perioperative care). Ninety-one, 83, and 96 patients were registered, respectively. There were no differences among the three groups in baseline characteristics except pathological stage and operation site in colon. Although the ERAS group started a soft diet earlier and had earlier discharge, there were no differences in intra- and post-operative morbidity rate, readmission rate, or reoperation rate. The ERAS perioperative care was a significant factor for reducing length of hospital stay in the multivariate analysis, while single-port surgery was not. In modern laparoscopic colon cancer treatment, a systemic approach such as the ERAS program appears to be more effective than a technical approach for significantly improving short-term surgical outcomes.

Alberta's Strategic Clinical Networks: A roadmap for the future

Clinical networks are groups of clinicians, patients, operational leaders, and other stakeholders who work together to solve health challenges, translate evidence into practice, and improve health outcomes and clinical care. Networks enable health, community, and academic partners to align their efforts, address priority issues, and advance quality improvements, health innovation, and transformational change on a local and system-wide scale. Clinical networks have existed in some countries for nearly 20 years. Alberta first implemented clinical networks in 2012 in specific areas of health. There are now 16 Strategic Clinical Networks (SCNs) in Alberta, embedded within a province-wide health system. The SCNs have developed an action plan that builds on their experience and identifies common areas of focus. This article describes the SCNs, their impact to date, and the objectives, areas of focus, and processes Alberta's SCNs will use to improve health outcomes and health system performance over the next 5 years.