Implementation of the ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) protocol for hysterectomy in the Piedmont Region with an audit&feedback approach: Study protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. A study of the EASY-NET project

A Retrospective Comparison Trial Investigating Aggregate Length of Stay Post Implementation of Seven Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocols between 2015 and 2022

(1) Introduction: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols can create a cultural shift that will benefit patients by significantly reducing patient length of stay when compared to an equivalent group of surgical patients not following an ERAS protocol. (2) Methods: In this retrospective study of 2236 patients in a multi-center, community-based healthcare system, matching was performed based on a multitude of variables related to demographics, comorbidities, and surgical outcomes across seven ERAS protocols. These cohorts were then compared pre and post ERAS protocol implementation. (3) Results: ERAS protocols significantly reduced hospital length of stay from 3.0 days to 2.1 days (p <0.0001). Additional significant outcomes included reductions in opioid consumption from 40 morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) to 20 MMEs (p <0.001) and decreased pain scores on postoperative day zero (POD 0), postoperative day one (POD 1), and postoperative day two (POD 2) when stratified into mild, moderate, and severe pain (p <0.001 on all three days). (4) Conclusions: ERAS protocols aggregately reduce hospital length of stay, pain scores, and opioid consumption.

Implementing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for hysterectomy in a hospital network with audit and feedback: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of implementing the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol in patients undergoing elective hysterectomy in a network of regional hospitals, supported by an intensive audit-and-feedback (A&F) approach.

DESIGN

A multi-centre, stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04063072).

SETTING

Gynaecological units in the Piemonte region, Italy.

POPULATION

Patients undergoing elective hysterectomy, either for cancer or for benign conditions.

METHODS

Twenty-three units (clusters), stratified by surgical volume, were randomised into four sequences. At baseline (first 3 months), standard care was continued in all units. Subsequently, the four sequences implemented the ERAS protocol successively every 3 months, after specific training. By the end of the study, each unit had a period in which standard care was maintained (control) and a period in which the protocol, supported by feedback, was applied (experimental).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Length of hospital stay (LOS), without outliers (>98th percentile).

RESULTS

Between September 2019 and May 2021, 2086 patients were included in the main analysis with an intention-to-treat approach: 1104 (53%) in the control period and 982 (47%) in the ERAS period. Compliance with the ERAS protocol increased from 60% in the control period to 76% in the experimental period, with an adjusted absolute difference of +13.3% (95% CI 11.6% to 15.0%). LOS, moving from 3.5 to 3.2 days, did not show a significant reduction (-0.12 days; 95% CI -0.30 to 0.07 days). No difference was observed in the occurrence of complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of the ERAS protocol for hysterectomy at the regional level, supported by an A&F approach, resulted in a substantial improvement in compliance, but without meaningful effects on LOS and complications. This study confirms the effectiveness of A&F in promoting important innovations in an entire hospital network and suggests the need of a higher compliance with the ERAS protocol to obtain valuable improvements in clinical outcomes.

Comparing Wound Healing and Infection Risk Between Early and Late Dressing Removal After Abdominal Hysterectomy

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluates the effects of dressing timing after abdominal hysterectomy on wound healing and infection risk. It highlights the potential for early dressing removal to accelerate healing and underscores the need for clear guidelines in wound care that align with the ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) protocol.

METHODS

Using a prospective, randomized, double-blind design, this research was carried out at Başakşehir Çam and Sakura City Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. The objective was to investigate the impact of early dressing removal on wound healing and infection rates after elective abdominal hysterectomy.

RESULTS

Demographic parameters such as age, height, weight, and body mass index (BMI) were found to have no significant impact on wound healing. Patients whose dressings were removed early had shorter hospital stays. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of wound complications and hospital readmission rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Early dressing removal after abdominal hysterectomy was observed to positively affect wound healing and facilitate earlier hospital discharge. However, no significant differences were found in hospital readmission rates between the two groups. These findings suggest that the dressing timing can be more flexible within the ERAS protocol and does not have a decisive impact on postoperative complications.

Impact of perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery on wound infection in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery: A meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of perioperative application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concepts on wound infections and post-operative complications in patients receiving orthopaedic surgery, to provide a theoretical basis for post-operative care. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the application of ERAS to patients receiving orthopaedic surgery, published up to October 2023, were identified in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, Wanfang, China Biomedical Literature Database and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases. Literature was screened and evaluated by two reviewers based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data were extracted from the final included articles. Data were analysed using RevMan 5.4 software. A total of 20 RCTs were included in the analysis, which included 1875 patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery, of whom 938 and 937 were in the ERAS and control groups, respectively. The analysis revealed that in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery, implementation of ERAS in the perioperative period was associated with a significantly reduced the rate of wound infections (1.6% vs. 6.19%, risk ratio [RR]: 0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.18-0.50, p < 0.001) and complication (5.12% vs. 21.88%, RR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.17-0.32, p < 0.001) and can effectively shorten the hospital length of stay (standardised mean difference [SMD]: -2.50 days, 95% CI: -3.17 to -1.83 days, p < 0.001) compared with that of conventional care. The available evidence suggests that the implementation of ERAS in the perioperative period of patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery could effectively reduce the rate of wound infections and complications, shorten the hospital length of stay and promote the early recovery of patients.

Factor structure of post-operative quality of recovery questionnaire (QoR-15): An Italian adaptation and validation

Background

The Quality of Recovery questionnaire (QoR-15) is an English instrument for measuring quality of recovery in surgical patients, not yet translated and validated in Italian when the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Piemonte studies were planned.

Objective

To produce the Italian version of the QoR-15 questionnaire, to evaluate its factorial structure and to assess the invariance between two types of surgery.

Methods

The Italian version (QoR-15I) was obtained translating and adapting the original version to the Italian context. The validation was performed suppling the QoR-15I to 3,784 patients enrolled in two parallel stepped wedge cluster randomised trials (ERAS Colon-rectum Piemonte; ERAS Gyneco Piemonte). The factor structure and its invariance between types of surgery was tested using confirmatory bifactor model and multi-group analysis. Comparative fit index (CFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) fit indices and their changes between nested models were used to assess the factor structure and the invariance.

Results

The bifactor model showed good fit (RMSEA = 0.049, CFI =0.957, SRMR = 0.036) and provided a general recovery factor and two specific factors for physical and mental recovery. Eighty-four percent of the common variance is attributable to the general factor, and thus the QoR-15I is sufficiently 'one-dimensional' with an adequate reliability (ω_h = 0.70). The ωs values for the physical and mental recovery factors were 0.01 and 0.13, respectively. Multigroup analysis supported configural (RMSEA = 0.053, CFI = 0.950, SRMR = 0.035) and metric invariance (ΔRMSEA = -0.004; ΔCFI = -0.002; ΔSRMR = 0.014), whereas the intercept constraint was removed from item 15 to obtain partial scalar invariance (ΔRMSEA = 0.002; ΔCFI = 0.007; ΔSRMR = 0.004). Construct validity was supported by a negative association of QoR-15I scores with all variables related to worse patient condition and more complex surgery.

Conclusion

Our results support the use of the QoR-15I as a valid, reliable, and clinically feasible tool for measuring the quality of recovery after surgery. The results of the confirmatory factor analyses suggest that a unique recovery score can be calculated and support measurement invariance of the QOR-15I across the two type of surgery, suggesting that the questionnaire has the same meaning and the same measurement parameters in colorectal and gynaecologic patients.