Sociodemographic Disparities in Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis is consistently considered a key indicator of anesthesia care quality. PONV may disproportionately impact disadvantaged patients. The primary objectives of this study were to examine the associations between sociodemographic factors and the incidence of PONV and clinician adherence to a PONV prophylaxis protocol. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients eligible for an institution-specific PONV prophylaxis protocol (2015-2017). Sociodemographic and PONV risk data were collected. Primary outcomes were PONV incidence and clinician adherence to PONV prophylaxis protocol. We used descriptive statistics to compare sociodemographics, procedural characteristics, and protocol adherence for patients with and without PONV. Multivariable logistic regression analysis followed by Tukey-Kramer correction for multiple comparisons was used to test for associations between patient sociodemographics, procedural characteristics, PONV risk, and (1) PONV incidence and (2) adherence to PONV prophylaxis protocol. RESULTS: Within the 8384 patient sample, Black patients had a 17% lower risk of PONV than White patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.95; P = .006). When there was adherence to the PONV prophylaxis protocol, Black patients were less likely to experience PONV compared to White patients (aOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70-0.93; P = .003). When there was adherence to the protocol, patients with Medicaid were less likely to experience PONV compared to privately insured patients (aOR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.64-1.04; P = .017). When the protocol was followed for high-risk patients, Hispanic patients were more likely to experience PONV than White patients (aOR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.18-7.42; adjusted P = .022). Compared to White patients, protocol adherence was lower for Black patients with moderate (aOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.91; P = .003) and high risk (aOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42-0.78; P = .0004). CONCLUSIONS: Racial and sociodemographic disparities exist in the incidence of PONV and clinician adherence to a PONV prophylaxis protocol. Awareness of such disparities in PONV prophylaxis could improve the quality of perioperative care.

Implementation of an enhanced recovery program for lower extremity bypass.

OBJECTIVE: Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have gained wide acceptance across multiple surgical disciplines to improve postoperative outcomes and to decrease hospital length of stay (LOS). However, there is limited information in the existing literature for vascular patients. We describe the implementation and early results of an ERP and barriers to its implementation for lower extremity bypass surgery. Our intention is to provide a framework to assist with implementation of similar ERPs. METHODS: Using the plan, do, check, adjust methodology, a multidisciplinary team was assembled. A database was used to collect information on patient-, procedure-, and ERP-specific metrics. We then retrospectively analyzed patients' demographics and outcomes. RESULTS: During 9 months, an ERP (n = 57) was successfully developed and implemented spanning preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases. ERP and non-ERP patient demographics were statistically similar. Early successes include 97% use of fascia iliaca block and multimodal analgesia administration in 81%. Barriers included only 47% of patients achieving day of surgery mobilization and 19% receiving celecoxib preoperatively. ERP patients had decreased total and postoperative LOS compared with non-ERP patients (n = 190) with a mean (standard deviation) total LOS of 8.32 (8.4) days vs 11.14 (10.1) days (P = .056) and postoperative LOS of 6.12 (6.02) days vs 7.98 (7.52) days (P = .089). There was significant decrease in observed to expected postoperative LOS (1.28 [0.66] vs 1.82 [1.38]; P = .005). Variable and total costs for ERP patients were significantly reduced ($13,208 [$9930] vs $18,777 [$19,118; P < .01] and $29,865 [$22,110] vs $40,328 [$37,820; P = .01], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Successful implementation of ERP for lower extremity bypass carries notable challenges but can have a significant impact on practice patterns. Further adjustment of our current protocol is anticipated, but early results are promising. Implementation of a vascular surgery ERP reduced variable and total costs and decreased total and postoperative LOS. We believe this protocol can easily be implemented at other institutions using the pathway outlined.