L’avenir en France de la réhabilitation améliorée après chirurgie, vu sous l’angle médico-économique

Outpatient shoulder prostheses: Feasibility, acceptance and safety

INTRODUCTION

Outpatient surgery in France is defined by the national authority for health (HAS) as a scheduled surgery enabling same-day discharge without any increased risk to the patient. With the advent of enhanced recovery after surgery, outpatient lower limb arthroplasty has become a common procedure. However, only 1.1% of knee arthroplasties in France were performed on an outpatient basis in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

1) assess early morbidity and mortality after outpatient shoulder arthroplasties to validate eligibility and safety criteria; and 2) assess patient acceptance of outpatient surgery.

METHODS

A single-center study with the following inclusion criteria: primary shoulder arthroplasty, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score I or II, no cognitive impairment, and no coronary artery or thromboembolic diseases. Analgesia was provided by bupivacaine via a peripheral nerve catheter in the first 72 hours followed by oral analgesics. Patients were discharged if the post-anesthetic discharge scoring system (PADSS) was>9/10 and the visual analog scale (VAS) was<5/10. Postoperative telephone interviews were carried out on D1, D2 and D3 to assess pain with the numerical rating scale and to collect data on their analgesic consumption. All patients were seen by an independent observer at one and six months for a clinical and radiologic follow-up and at 90 days during a consultation with the senior surgeon. The primary endpoint was the 90-day morbidity and mortality rate (readmissions, rehospitalizations, and minor and major complications). A satisfaction questionnaire was collected at one and six months.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were offered an outpatient shoulder arthroplasty between February 2016 and February 2018: 12 (33%) refused with no valid reasons and 24 patients agreed to the procedure (seven hemiarthroplasties, nine anatomic shoulder arthroplasties and eight reverse shoulder arthroplasties). The mean age at surgery was 70 years (55-82), mean body mass index (BMI) was 26 (21-32) and 14 patients were ASA II (66%). Three patients (12%) refused same-day discharge despite a PADSS score>9/10 and adequate pain management. Two patients (8%) were not discharged home on the same day as the surgery for medical reasons (one for pain and one for high blood pressure). No readmissions or complications were reported for the 19 outpatient arthroplasties. None of the outpatients used opioids. All patients were satisfied with their functional outcome, 84% were satisfied with the outpatient management and 17% felt they were insufficiently monitored and regretted that they were not hospitalized.

CONCLUSIONS

1) outpatient shoulder arthroplasty can be safely proposed to selected patients with low comorbidities, regardless of their age and type of implant; 2) the acceptance rate for outpatient shoulder arthroplasty remained low among our patient population. These results should incite us to better educate patients about outpatient surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; retrospective study.

Labelling as reference Centre of GRACE (Groupe francophone de Réhabilitation Améliorée après ChirurgiE) for colorectal surgery: its impact on the implementation of enhanced recovery programme at the University Hospital of Liège

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery programme (ERP) has been used in our hospital since 2005 for selected colorectal surgeries. Since October 2015, after labelling as GRACE reference centre, we included all patients scheduled for elective colorectal surgery in this programme. We assessed the impact of our labelling on the implementation of ERP.

METHODS

Results of our first 100 patients entered in the GRACE database were analyzed: length of stay, complications, readmission, adherence to the protocol. These results are compared to those of the last 100 patients undergoing colorectal surgery before our labelling.

RESULTS

Patients' characteristics in both groups were similar. The complications rate was similar in both groups. The global length of hospital stay was 4 [5] days vs. 8.5 [8] (median [IQR]), respectively after and before labelling; p < .001. The duration of hospitalization for the different subgroups (age, surgical approach, types of surgery) were significantly shorter after our labelling (respectively: p < .001, p < .01, and p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that labelling as reference centre increases the efficiency of the implementation of ERP. The fact that all subgroups of patients benefit from ERP must encourage inclusion of all patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery in ERP.

How to implement an enhanced recovery programme after colorectal surgery?

INTRODUCTION

Although the concept of enhanced recovery after surgery was introduced more than 20 years ago, its implementation in daily practice still remains difficult.

RESULTS

This article addresses bottlenecks and barriers to the development of enhanced recovery programme (ERP). Barriers to the implementation are multifactorial and are raised by the different actors of these programmes: surgeons, anaesthetists, nurses, patients. Solutions and steps that must be respected to succeed in introducing ERP in an hospital are proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

Large-scale implementation of ERP continues to face mainly lack of trust and communication. Solutions exist and are based particularly on team work and interdisciplinary collaboration.

Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Program in Liver Surgery

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have been shown to ease the postoperative recovery and improve clinical outcomes for various surgery types. ERAS cost-effectiveness was demonstrated for colorectal surgery but not for liver surgery. The present study aim was to analyze the implementation costs and benefits of a specific ERAS program in liver surgery.

METHODS

A dedicated ERAS protocol for liver surgery was implemented in our department in July 2013. The subsequent year all consecutive patients undergoing liver surgery were treated according to this protocol (ERAS group). They were compared in terms of real in-hospital costs with a patient series before ERAS implementation (pre-ERAS group). Mean costs per patient were compared with a bootstrap T test. A cost-minimization analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Seventy-four ERAS patients were compared with 100 pre-ERAS patients. There were no significant pre- and intraoperative differences between the two groups, except for the laparoscopy number (n = 18 ERAS, n = 9 pre-ERAS, p = 0.010). Overall postoperative complications were observed in 36 (49 %) and 64 patients (64 %) in the ERAS and pre-ERAS groups, respectively (p = 0.046). The median length of stay was significantly shorter for the ERAS group (8 vs. 10 days, p = 0.006). The total mean costs per patient were €38,726 and €42,356 for ERAS and pre-ERAS (p = 0.467). The cost-minimization analysis showed a total mean cost reduction of €3080 per patient after ERAS implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS implementation for liver surgery induced a non-significant decrease in cost compared to standard care. Significant decreased complication rate and hospital stay were observed in the ERAS group.

The benefits of enhanced recovery after surgery

Enhanced recovery programs (ERP) after surgery are now being increasingly applied in daily practice. The purpose of this article is to review specific aspects and advantages of this approach. Beyond the reduction in overall morbidity (found for multiple surgical specialties), ERP include issues and stakes that affect patient care, the care team and society in general. Data from the literature are in agreement, emphasizing that, in this clinical pathway, the patient has thus become an actor in his own care, whose active participation is paramount to the success of the program. In parallel with this, a spirit of teamwork is required and the program contributes substantially to cohesion within the team. Finally, all studies show that ERP have a beneficial effect in economic terms for society.

Spanish survey on enhanced recovery after surgery

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to determine the interest in ERAS protocols, and the extent to which clinicians are familiar with and apply these protocols during perioperative care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Free access survey hosted on the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care; Spanish Association of Surgeons and Spanish Society of Enteral and Parenteral nutrition and ERAS Spain (GERM) websites conducted between September and December 2014.

RESULTS

The survey was answered by 272 professionals (44.5% anaesthetists, 45.2% general surgeons) from 110 hospitals, 73% of whom had experience in ERAS protocols. Most (86.1%) had specific knowledge of ERAS protocols, whereas only 50.9% were familiar with ERAS recommendations and 42.4% with GERM recommendations. Most (73.1%) respondents reported that ERAS protocols are performed in their hospitals, mainly in colorectal surgery (93%), and 52.2% reported that GERM/ERAS recommendations are followed. Nearly all (95.5%) would be interested in the development of multidisciplinary national guidelines. Less than half (46.6%) perform preoperative nutritional assessment, albeit without a universal malnutrition screening method (56.8%). Preoperative loading with carbohydrate drinks is carried out in only 51.4% of cases; nasogastric tube and drainage are avoided (79.3%), prophylaxis for postoperative nausea and vomiting (73.4%), goal directed fluid therapy (73.3%), and active normothermia maintenance (87.4%) are performed. In most cases, mobilization (90.1%) and early feeding (87.9%) are performed. The leading causes of protocol failure are postoperative nausea and vomiting (46.5%) and ileus (58.9%).

CONCLUSION

Clinicians in Spain are familiar with fast track protocols, although there is no overall consensus, and hospitals do not adhere to existing guidelines. Overall compliance with the items of the protocol is adequate, although perioperative nutritional management is poor.

Cost-benefit analysis of an enhanced recovery protocol for pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes have been shown to decrease complications and hospital stay. The cost-effectiveness of such programmes has been demonstrated for colorectal surgery. This study aimed to assess the economic outcomes of a standard ERAS programme for pancreaticoduodenectomy.

METHODS

ERAS for pancreaticoduodenectomy was implemented in October 2012. All consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy until October 2014 were recorded. This group was compared in terms of costs with a cohort of consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy between January 2010 and October 2012, before ERAS implementation. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative real costs were collected for each patient via the hospital administration. A bootstrap independent t test was used for comparison. ERAS-specific costs were integrated into the model.

RESULTS

The groups were well matched in terms of demographic and surgical details. The overall complication rate was 68 per cent (50 of 74 patients) and 82 per cent (71 of 87 patients) in the ERAS and pre-ERAS groups respectively (P = 0·046). Median hospital stay was lower in the ERAS group (15 versus 19 days; P = 0·029). ERAS-specific costs were €922 per patient. Mean total costs were €56 083 per patient in the ERAS group and €63 821 per patient in the pre-ERAS group (P = 0·273). The mean intensive care unit (ICU) and intermediate care costs were €9139 and €13 793 per patient for the ERAS and pre-ERAS groups respectively (P = 0·151).

CONCLUSION

ERAS implementation for pancreaticoduodenectomy did not increase the costs in this cohort. Savings were noted in anaesthesia/operating room, medication and laboratory costs. Fewer patients in the ERAS group required an ICU stay.