The Successful Implementation of a Modified Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Program for Bariatric Surgery in a South African Teaching Hospital

A scoping review of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS), protocol implementation, and its impact on surgical outcomes and healthcare systems in Africa

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a patient-centered approach to surgery designed to reduce stress responses and facilitate faster recovery. ERAS protocols have been widely adopted in high-income countries, supported by robust research demonstrating improved patient outcomes. However, in Africa, there is limited evidence regarding its implementation. This review aims to identify the existing literature on the implementation of ERAS principles in Africa, the reported clinical outcomes, and the challenges and recommendations for successful implementation.

METHODS

We conducted a librarian-assisted literature search of electronic research databases between October and November 2023. Titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility, and duplicates were then removed, followed by full-text assessment of potentially eligible studies. We utilized the summative content analysis method to synthesize and group the data into fewer categories based on agreed-upon criteria. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the results.

RESULTS

The search identified 342 potential studies resulting in 15 eligible studies for inclusion in the review. The publication years ranged from 2016 to 2023. The studies originated from three countries: Egypt (n = 10), South Africa (n = 4), and Uganda (n = 1). Successful implementation was associated with reduced hospital length of stay (n = 12), lower mortality rates (n = 3), and improved pain outcomes (n = 7). Challenges included protocol adherence (n = 5) and limitations of the research design to generate strong evidence (n = 3). Recommendations included formal adoption of ERAS principles (n = 5), the need for sustained research commitment, and exploration of the applicability of ERAS in diverse surgical contexts (n = 8). Large-scale implementation beyond individual institutions was encouraged to further validate its impact on patient outcomes and healthcare costs (n = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the limited number of studies on ERAS implementation in Africa, the available evidence suggests that it reduces the length of hospital stays and mortality rates. This is crucial for the region, given its higher mortality rates, necessitating more collaborative, methodically well-designed studies to establish stronger evidence for ERAS in lower-resource environments.

Improving quality of surgical and anaesthesia care in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review of hospital-based quality improvement interventions

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review existing literature on hospital-based quality improvement studies in sub-Saharan Africa that aim to improve surgical and anaesthesia care, capturing clinical, process and implementation outcomes in order to evaluate the impact of the intervention and implementation learning.

DESIGN

We conducted a systematic literature review and narrative synthesis.

SETTING

Literature on hospital-based quality improvement studies in sub-Saharan Africa reviewed until 31 December 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, CINAHL, Web of Science databases and grey literature were searched.

INTERVENTION

We extracted data on intervention characteristics and how the intervention was delivered and evaluated.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Importantly, we assessed whether clinical, process and implementation outcomes were collected and separately categorised the outcomes under the Institute of Medicine quality domains. Risk of bias was not assessed.

RESULTS

Of 1573 articles identified, 49 were included from 17/48 sub-Saharan African countries, 16 of which were low-income or lower middle-income countries. Almost two-thirds of the studies took place in East Africa (31/49, 63.2%). The most common intervention focus was reduction of surgical site infection (12/49, 24.5%) and use of a surgical safety checklist (14/49, 28.6%). Use of implementation and quality improvement science methods were rare. Over half the studies measured clinical outcomes (29/49, 59.2%), with the most commonly reported ones being perioperative mortality (13/29, 44.8%) and surgical site infection rate (14/29, 48.3%). Process and implementation outcomes were reported in over two thirds of the studies (34/49, 69.4% and 35, 71.4%, respectively). The most studied quality domain was safety (44/49, 89.8%), with efficiency (4/49, 8.2%) and equitability (2/49, 4.1%) the least studied domains.

CONCLUSIONS

There are few hospital-based studies that focus on improving the quality of surgical and anaesthesia care in sub-Saharan Africa. Use of implementation and quality improvement methodologies remain low, and some quality domains are neglected.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019125570.

Using a Retrospective Secondary Data Analysis to Identify Risk Factors for Pulmonary Complications in Trauma Patients in Pietermaritzburg, South Africa

BACKGROUND

The trauma burden in South Africa is significant. The objective of this project was to investigate the incidence of posttrauma pulmonary complications (PPCs) and to identify patient, health risks, and hospital factors, which predispose trauma patients to develop PPCs hospital in Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.

METHODS

The design was a retrospective secondary data analysis of patients who presented as a trauma admission via the health systems' Hybrid Electronic Medical Registry. The final data set included 6382 trauma admissions.

RESULTS

The PPC rate was 9.4% for patients with a surgical intervention versus 1.9% for those without a surgical intervention. Of the total 289 PPCs reported, the most common included pneumonia or atelectasis (46.4%) and prolonged ventilation (36.0%). The risk of developing a PPC was statistically significantly (P < 0.0001) associated with surgical intervention and the number of surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

The trauma burden in South Africa requires complex medical and surgical interventions. The incidence of PPCs is significantly associated with surgical intervention. With the increasing demand to harness data and improve patient care, the Hybrid Electronic Medical Registry proves to be a driver for quality improvement.

First Successful Large-Scale Introduction of an Enhanced Recovery after Bariatric Surgery (ERABS) Program in the Middle East: The Results and Lessons Learned of Tawam Hospital/Johns Hopkins, a Tertiary Governmental Center in the UAE

BACKGROUND

Although enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) has proven to be safe and cost-effective, this concept is relatively new in the Middle East.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of consecutive registered cohorts of patients who underwent primary and purely laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) were compared before introduction of ERABS (2010-2014) and after ERABS (2015-2017) at Tawam Hospital/Johns Hopkins, the UAE.

RESULTS

A total of 462 eligible bariatric patients (LSG 414 and LRYGB 48) were operated on before and 1602 (LSG 1436 and LRYGB 166) after introduction of the ERABS. Significant improvements of mean patient time of the patient being within the OR for LSG (from 2:27 to 1:23 min, p = 0.000) and LRYGB (from 3:17 to 1:59 min, p = 0.000) were achieved when comparing pre-ERABS with after introduction of ERABS. Furthermore, there was a significant decrease in LOS in both LSG (from 3.2 to 1.5 days, p = 0.000) and in LRYGB (from 3.5 to 1.7 days, p = 0.000). Major (CD classification III-IV) complications decreased significantly in LSG (from 13.8 to 0.8%, p = 0.000) and were similar in LRYGB (from 4.2% to 3.0%, p = NS). The readmission rate for LSG (from 2.9 to 2.6%, p = NS) or LRYGB (from 0 to 4.8%, p = NS) and the reoperation rates after LSG (from 0.7 to 0.5%, p = NS) and LRYGB (from 0 to 2.4%, p = NS) did not differ between both groups following introduction of ERABS.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a standardized ERABS program in the Middle East is feasible and safe and leads to reduced LOS and OR times.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Perioperative Nutrition, Metabolic, and Nonsurgical Support of Patients Undergoing Bariatric Procedures - 2019 Update: Cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists.

METHODS

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

RESULTS

New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures - 2019 update: cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPG) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the Obesity Medicine Association, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists boards of directors in adherence to the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPG, algorithms, and checklists.

METHODS

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

RESULTS

New or updated topics in this CPG include contextualization in an adiposity-based, chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based, and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current healthcare arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence-based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.