Clinicians' perceptions of "enhanced recovery after surgery" (ERAS) protocols to improve patient safety in surgery: a national survey from Australia.

BACKGROUND: Surgical patients are at risk of postoperative complications, which may lead to increased morbidity, mortality, hospital length-of-stay and healthcare costs. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) protocols are evidence-based and have demonstrated effectiveness in decreasing complications and associated consequences. However, their adoption in Australia has been limited and the reason for this is unclear. This study aimed to describe clinicians' perceptions of ERAS protocols in Australia. METHODS: A national online survey of anaesthetists, surgeons and nurses was undertaken. Invitations to participate were distributed via emails from professional colleges. The 30-item survey captured respondent characteristics, ERAS perceptions, beliefs, education and learning preferences and future planning considerations. The final question was open-ended for elaboration of perceptions of ERAS. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to describe and compare group differences across disciplines relative to perceptions of ERAS. RESULTS: The sample included 178 responses (116 nurses, 65.2%; 36 surgeons, 20.2%; 26 anaesthetists, 14.6%) across six states and two territories. More than half (n = 104; 58.8%) had used ERAS protocols in patient care, and most perceived they were 'very knowledgeable' (n = 24; 13.6%) or 'knowledgeable' (n = 71; 40.3%) of ERAS. However, fewer nurses had cared for a patient using ERAS (p <.01) and nurses reported lower levels of knowledge (p <.001) than their medical counterparts. Most respondents agreed ERAS protocols improved patient care and financial efficiency and were a reasonable time investment (overall Md 3-5), but nurses generally recorded lower levels of agreement (p.013 to < 0.001). Lack of information was the greatest barrier to ERAS knowledge (n = 97; 62.6%), while seminars/lectures from international and national leaders were the preferred learning method (n = 59; 41.3%). Most supported broad implementation of ERAS (n = 130; 87.8%). CONCLUSION: There is a need to promote ERAS and provide education, which may be nuanced based on the results, to improve implementation in Australia. Nurses particularly need to be engaged in ERAS protocols given their significant presence throughout the surgical journey. There is also a need to co-design implementation strategies with stakeholders that target identified facilitators and barriers, including lack of support from senior administration, managers and clinicians and resource constraints.

Surgeon-Performed Intraoperative Peripheral Nerve Blocks and Periarticular Infiltration During Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Critical Analysis Review.

➢: Surgeon-performed intraoperative peripheral nerve blocks may improve operating room efficiency and reduce hospital resource utilization and, ultimately, costs. Additionally, these blocks can be safely performed intraoperatively by most orthopaedic surgeons, while only specifically trained physicians are able to perform ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks. ➢: IPACK (infiltration between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee) blocks are at least noninferior to periarticular infiltration when combined with an adductor canal block for analgesia following total knee arthroplasty. ➢: Surgeon-performed intraoperative adductor canal blocks are technically feasible and offer reliable anesthesia comparable with ultrasound-guided blocks performed by anesthesiologists. While clinical studies have shown promising results, additional Level-I studies are required. ➢: A surgeon-performed intraoperative psoas compartment block has been described as a readily available and safe technique, although there is some concern for femoral nerve analgesia, and temporary sensory changes have been reported.