Self-assessment of nursing preparedness and knowledge in the care of patients with obstetric anal sphincter injuries and utilization of a computer-based learning module for continued nursing education in the United States.

IMPORTANCE: Perineal injury is the most common complication of vaginal delivery, and labor and delivery (L&D) nurses are crucial in managing and educating women following perineal trauma. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to assess L&D nurse experience, knowledge, and self-perception of preparedness in caring for women with obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) and to compare pre- and post-test scores using a computer-based learning module (CBL) for OASIS nurse education. STUDY DESIGN: All L&D nurses were invited to complete a voluntary, self-assessment questionnaire inquiring about prior experience, training, and education and current clinical practice in caring for patients with OASIS. They were also asked to answer ten knowledge-based questions about OASIS. The primary outcome was change in pretest and posttest knowledge-based scores after completion of CBL. RESULTS: Forty-one L&D nurses voluntarily responded to the self-assessment survey. Of respondents, 20% answered they were "very comfortable", 48% "comfortable", 23% "neutral," and 8% "uncomfortable" for caring for women with OASIS post-delivery. Fifty-three percent of reported having no formal education in nursing school about OASIS and 35% reported no formal training while at work. The average pretest knowledge test score was 66.3% and 93.5% (p < 0.001) after completion of the CBL. CONCLUSIONS: Most L&D nurses in this study reported having very limited formal nursing education in OASIS. Regardless of this lack of formal training, the majority of L&D nurses in this sample described themselves as comfortable caring for patients with OASIS post-delivery. Completion of a CBL was associated with higher OASIS knowledge scores.

The American Urogynecologic Society Action Plan on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Developed by the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Task Force.

ABSTRACT: The American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS) identified diversity, equity, and inclusion as the cornerstone of excellence in governance and operations. Although efforts to increase diversity of our membership have been ongoing for years, there had not previously been an adequate investment to ensure an inclusive climate that emphasizes equity across our volunteers and programs. In June 2020, the AUGS President, Dr Shawn Menefee, and Board of Directors called for a Presidential Task Force on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion to study the current state of our society and make recommendations for future directions. The charge was intentionally broad. In review of the literature, there was little to inform the best means to proceed aside from administering climate surveys to gauge the current culture of inclusion and bias. The task force believed that the challenge was not only to describe the problem but also to articulate solutions. We ultimately moved to rewrite the Diversity and Inclusion and Code of Conduct Statements and develop an Action Plan that would accelerate the efforts of AUGS to foster inclusion and improve equity through the existing governance structure. In this document, we describe how the task force was organized and conducted the work to develop strategies that were aligned with the AUGS mission: "As the leader in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery, AUGS drives excellence in care for women through education, research, advocacy, and interdisciplinary collaboration."

Review of enhanced recovery programs in benign gynecologic surgery.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) are evidence-based protocols designed to improve functional rehabilitation after surgery. ERPs have gained widespread acceptance in many surgical disciplines, and their use leads to significant improvements in patient outcomes while reducing hospital length of stay (LOS). There remains a paucity of data on the use of ERPs in benign gynecologic surgery. The purpose of this review was to evaluate current literature on the use of ERP concepts in benign gynecologic surgery. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane databases was conducted, cross-referencing search terms related to gynecologic surgery and ERP concepts. The search was limited to publications available in English. Studies published prior to 2000, and those involving gynecologic oncology, nonadult patients, and outpatient surgery were excluded. RESULTS: Nine studies were included in the analysis. Due to heterogeneity of the included studies, no statistical pooling was possible and comparison between studies was limited to their respective themes. Primary study outcomes included LOS, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), pain management, patient satisfaction, and hospital costs. Five studies investigated ERPs, two evaluated measures to improve PONV, and four focused on unique aspects of pain management. Across the studies, ERPs that focused on the patients' basic symptoms and recovery were found to have equal, if not better, outcomes than standard practice. CONCLUSIONS: This integrative review supports the implementation of ERPs in benign gynecologic surgery. The results showed that the use of ERPs decreased LOS, improved pain scores, and reduced hospital costs, without increasing perioperative complications. We suggest additional randomized controlled trials of ERP concepts in benign gynecologic surgery to support their more widespread use and application.

Enhanced Recovery Implementation in Major Gynecologic Surgeries: Effect of Care Standardization.

OBJECTIVE: To examine implementing an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for women undergoing major gynecologic surgery at an academic institution and compare surgical outcomes before and after implementation. METHODS: Two ERAS protocols were developed: a full pathway using regional anesthesia for open procedures and a light pathway without regional anesthesia for vaginal and minimally invasive procedures. Enhanced recovery after surgery pathways included extensive preoperative counseling, carbohydrate loading and oral fluids before surgery, multimodal analgesia with avoidance of intravenous opioids, intraoperative goal-directed fluid resuscitation, and immediate postoperative feeding and ambulation. A before-and-after study design was used to compare clinical outcomes, costs, and patient satisfaction. Complications and risk-adjusted length of stay were drawn from the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. RESULTS: On the ERAS full protocol, 136 patients were compared with 211 historical controls and the median length of stay was reduced (2.0 compared with 3.0 days; P=.007) despite an increase in National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-predicted length of stay (2.5 compared with 2.0 days; P=.009). Reductions were seen in median intraoperative morphine equivalents (0.3 compared with 12.7 mg; P<.001), intraoperative (285 compared with 1,250 mL; P<.001) and total intravenous fluids (-917.5 compared with 1,410 mL; P<.001), immediate postoperative pain scores (3.7 compared with 5.0; P<.001), and total complications (21.3% compared with 40.2%; P=.004). On the ERAS light protocol, 249 patients were compared with 324 historical controls and demonstrated decreased intraoperative and postoperative morphine equivalents (0.0 compared with 13.0 mg; P<.001 and 15.0 compared with 23.6 mg; P<.001) and decreased intraoperative and overall net intravenous fluids (P<.001). Patient satisfaction scores showed a marked and significant improvement on focus questions regarding pain control, nurses keeping patients informed, and staff teamwork; 30-day total hospital costs were significantly decreased in both ERAS groups. CONCLUSION: Implementation of ERAS protocols in gynecologic surgery was associated with a substantial decrease in intravenous fluids and morphine administration coupled with reduction in length of stay for open procedures combined with improved patient satisfaction and decreased hospital costs.

Treatment strategies for pelvic organ prolapse: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To compare the relative cost effectiveness of treatment decision alternatives for post-hysterectomy pelvic organ prolapse (POP). METHODS: A Markov decision analysis model was used to assess and compare the relative cost effectiveness of expectant management, use of a pessary, and surgery for obtaining months of quality-adjusted life over 1 year. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine whether the results depended on specific estimates of patient utilities for pessary use, probabilities for complications and other events, and estimated costs. RESULTS: Only two treatment alternatives were found to be efficient choices: initial pessary use and vaginal reconstructive surgery (VRS). Pessary use (including patients that eventually transitioned to surgery) achieved 10.4 quality-adjusted months, at a cost of $10,000 per patient, while VRS obtained 11.4 quality-adjusted months, at $15,000 per patient. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that these baseline results depended on several key estimates in the model. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that pessary use and VRS are the most cost-effective treatment alternatives for treating post-hysterectomy vaginal prolapse. Additional research is needed to standardize POP outcomes and complications, so that healthcare providers can best utilize cost information in balancing the risks and benefits of their treatment decisions.