Burden incurred by patients and their caregivers after outpatient surgery: a prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The burden of patients and their caregivers after outpatient surgery has not been fully examined. The number of outpatient surgeries has dramatically increased in the last several years, particularly in the orthopaedic sector. Patients undergoing outpatient orthopaedic procedures may be expected to have more postdischarge pain than those undergoing nonorthopaedic outpatient procedures. In light of this, assessment of patient and caregiver expectations and actual burden after discharge is of importance. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We assessed the impact of outpatient surgery on recovery of patients and their caregivers in the postoperative period by determining (1) expected versus actual time to resume daily activities, including work; (2) expected versus actual recovery at 7 and 30 days postoperatively; and (3) the number of caregivers that felt emotional or physical disturbances from caring for outpatients. METHODS: Forty-four adult patients undergoing outpatient surgical procedures and their primary caregivers were enrolled in this prospective survey study, of which 30% were orthopaedic patients. Surveys assessing postoperative recovery were given to patients at six time points, on Postoperative Days 0 to 3, 7, and 30. Surveys assessing the burden of informal caregiving were given to each patient's primary caregiver at four time points, on Postoperative Days 1 to 3 and 7. The enrollment rate was 79% (44 enrolled of 56 approached) and the survey response rate was 100% for patients and 93% (41 of 44) for caregivers. RESULTS: We found that 16 of 44 patients (36%) needed more time than originally anticipated to resume their daily activities and three of 29 patients (10%) needed more time off from work than originally anticipated. Patients were approximately 66% and 88% fully recovered 7 and 30 days after surgery, respectively. The primary caregivers noted disturbances in emotional (nine of 43, 21%) and physical (17 of 43, 40%) aspects of their daily lives while providing care for patients. Our surveyed patients were from multiple surgical services; however, our results may be generalized to an orthopaedic population, although they may underestimate actual results for this population given their generally higher pain scores. CONCLUSIONS: Patients may take longer to recover from outpatient surgery than previously recognized. As increased pain and prolonged recovery may be associated with increased caregiver burden, these data are of particular significance to the outpatient orthopaedic surgical population. Informal caregiving after outpatient surgery may be an unrecognized physical and psychologic burden and may have a significant societal impact. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

A Model for the Departmental Quality Management Infrastructure Within an Academic Health System.

As quality improvement and patient safety come to play a larger role in health care, academic medical centers and health systems are poised to take a leadership role in addressing these issues. Academic medical centers can leverage their large integrated footprint and have the ability to innovate in this field. However, a robust quality management infrastructure is needed to support these efforts. In this context, quality and safety are often described at the executive level and at the unit level. Yet, the role of individual departments, which are often the dominant functional unit within a hospital, in realizing health system quality and safety goals has not been addressed. Developing a departmental quality management infrastructure is challenging because departments are diverse in composition, size, resources, and needs.In this article, the authors describe the model of departmental quality management infrastructure that has been implemented at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. This model leverages the fractal approach, linking departments horizontally to support peer and organizational learning and connecting departments vertically to support accountability to the hospital, health system, and board of trustees. This model also provides both structure and flexibility to meet individual departmental needs, recognizing that independence and interdependence are needed for large academic medical centers. The authors describe the structure, function, and support system for this model as well as the practical and essential steps for its implementation. They also provide examples of its early success.