Implementation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) program in neurosurgery.

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) guidelines have been proven to simplify postoperative care and improve recovery in several surgical disciplines. The authors set out to create and launch an ERAS® program for cranial neurosurgery that meets official ERAS® Society standards. The authors summarize the successive steps taken to achieve this goal in two specific neurosurgical conditions and describe the challenges they faced. METHODS: Pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (Pit-NET) resected by a transsphenoidal approach and craniosynostosis (Cs) repair were selected as appropriate targets for the implementation of ERAS® program in the Department of Neurosurgery. A multidisciplinary team with experience in managing these pathologies was created. A specialized ERAS® nurse coordinator was hired. An ERAS® certification process was performed involving 4 seminars separated by 3 active phases under the supervision of an ERAS® coach. RESULTS: The ERAS® Pit-NET team included 8 active members. The ERAS® Cs team included 12 active members. Through the ERAS® certification process, areas for improvement were identified, local protocols were written, and the ERAS® program was implemented. Patient-centered strategies were developed to increase compliance with the ERAS® protocols. A prospective database was designed for ongoing program evaluation. Certification was achieved in 18 months. Direct costs and time requirements are reported. CONCLUSION: Successful ERAS® certification requires a committed multidisciplinary team, an ERAS® coach, and a dedicated nurse coordinator.

Swiss Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Database.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have considerably improved postoperative outcomes and are in use for various types of surgery. The prospective audit system (EIAS) could be a powerful tool for large-scale outcome research but its database has not been validated yet. METHODS: Swiss ERAS centers were invited to contribute to the validation of the Swiss chapter for colorectal surgery. A monitoring team performed on-site visits by the use of a standardized checklist. Validation criteria were (I) coverage (No. of operated patients within ERAS protocol; target threshold for validation: ≥ 80%), (II) missing data (8 predefined variables; target ≤ 10%), and (III) accuracy (2 predefined variables, target ≥ 80%). These criteria were assessed by comparing EIAS entries with the medical charts of a random sample of patients per center (range 15-20). RESULTS: Out of 18 Swiss ERAS centers, 15 agreed to have onsite monitoring but 13 granted access to the final dataset. ERAS coverage was available in only 7 centers and varied between 76 and 100%. Overall missing data rate was 5.7% and concerned mainly the variables "urinary catheter removal" (16.4%) and "mobilization on day 1" (16%). Accuracy for the length of hospital stay and complications was overall 84.6%. Overall, 5 over 13 centers failed in the validation process for one or several criteria. CONCLUSION: EIAS was validated in most Swiss ERAS centers. Potential patient selection and missing data remain sources of bias in non-validated centers. Therefore, simplified validation of other centers appears to be mandatory before large-scale use of the EIAS dataset.

A 2-Year Experience With Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Evaluation of Compliance and Outcomes in Pancreatic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs reduce recovery time, length of stay (LOS), and complications after major surgical procedures. PURPOSE: We evaluated our 2-year experience with a newly implemented comprehensive ERAS program at a high-volume center after pancreatic surgery. METHODS: Outcomes, cost, and compliance metrics were assessed in 215 patients who underwent elective pancreatic surgery (pre-ERAS; n = 99; post-ERAS: n = 116). Mann-Whitney U and χ2 tests were used to evaluate continuous and categorical variables. RESULTS: There were significant decreases in LOS and cost in the post-ERAS cohorts. There were significant increases in compliance with ERAS implementation. Postoperative complication, readmission, and survival rates did not increase. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of ERAS at a large-volume hospital may improve compliance and reduce costs and LOS without increasing adverse outcomes.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Esophagectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs provide a format for multidisciplinary care and has been shown to predictably improve short term outcomes associated with surgical procedures. Esophagectomy has historically been associated with significant levels of morbidity and mortality and as a result routine application and audit of ERAS guidelines specifically designed for esophageal resection has significant potential to improve outcomes associated with this complex procedure. METHODS: A team of international experts in the surgical management of esophageal cancer was assembled and the existing literature was identified and reviewed prior to the production of the guidelines. Well established procedure specific components of ERAS were reviewed and updated with changes relevant to esophagectomy. Procedure specific, operative and technical sections were produced utilizing the best current level of evidence. All sections were rated regarding the level of evidence and overall recommendation according to the evaluation (GRADE) system. RESULTS: Thirty-nine sections were ultimately produced and assessed for quality of evidence and recommendations. Some sections were completely new to ERAS programs due to the fact that esophagectomy is the first guideline with a thoracic component to the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The current ERAS society guidelines should be reviewed and applied in all centers looking to improve outcomes and quality associated with esophageal resection.

Consensus on Training and Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: A Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is widely accepted in current surgical practice due to its positive impact on patient outcomes. The successful implementation of ERAS is challenging and compliance with protocols varies widely. Continual staff education is essential for successful ERAS programmes. Teaching modalities exist, but there remains no agreement regarding the optimal training curriculum or how its effectiveness is assessed. We aimed to draw consensus from an expert panel regarding the successful training and implementation of ERAS. METHODS: A modified Delphi technique was used; three rounds of questionnaires were sent to 58 selected international experts from 11 countries across multiple ERAS specialities and multidisciplinary teams (MDT) between January 2016 and February 2017. We interrogated opinion regarding four topics: (1) the components of a training curriculum and the structure of training courses; (2) the optimal framework for successful implementation and audit of ERAS including a guide for data collection; (3) a framework to assess the effectiveness of training; (4) criteria to define ERAS training centres of excellence. RESULTS: An ERAS training course must cover the evidence-based principles of ERAS with team-oriented training. Successful implementation requires strong leadership, an ERAS facilitator and an effective MDT. Effectiveness of training can be measured by improved compliance. A training centre of excellence should show a willingness to teach and demonstrable team working. CONCLUSIONS: We propose an international expert consensus providing an ERAS training curriculum, a framework for successful implementation, methods for assessing effectiveness of training and a definition of ERAS training centres of excellence.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Can We Rely on the Key Factors or Do We Need the Bel Ensemble?

BACKGROUND: The success of enhanced recovery (ERAS) pathways depends on the actual application of the intended protocol (adherence), but its full implementation remains challenging. In order to potentially streamline the pathway, it is indispensable to know the impact of individual items and the entire protocol on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective analysis including all consecutive colorectal ERAS patients since implementation (May 2011) until February 2014; demographics, adherence and outcomes were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Primary outcome was the impact of individual item and of the entire protocol on complications (overall and major) and length of hospital stay. Statistical analysis included logistic multivariate regression and adjustment for confounding factors. RESULTS: There were 328 patients with complete data sets analyzed. A minimally invasive approach [odd ratio (OR) 0.62; confidence interval (CI) 0.4-0.9] was significantly associated with less overall complications. In contrast, the use of prophylactic nasogastric tubes (OR 3.18; CI 1.4-7.4), prophylactic abdominal and pelvic drains (OR 1.96; 1.2-3.2) and intraoperative thoracic epidural analgesia (OR 1.76; CI 1.3-2.4) were associated with more overall complications. Minimal invasive approach was further associated with reduced hospital stay (OR 0.5; CI 0.4-0.7) and less major complications (OR 0.58; CI 0.4-0.8). Higher adherence to the entire ERAS protocol was associated with significantly less complications (P < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive surgery was the single most important component of the ERAS pathway while nasogastric tubes, drains and epidurals should be avoided. Overall, increasing adherence with the protocol was associated with better outcomes and should be the goal.

Enhanced Recovery after Elective Colorectal Surgery - Reasons for Non-Compliance with the Protocol.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols for elective colorectal surgery reduce the intensity of postoperative complications, hospital stays and costs. Improvements in clinical outcome are directly proportional to the adherence to the recommended pathway (compliance). The aim of the present study was to analyze reasons for the non-compliance of colorectal surgeries with the ERAS protocol. METHODS: A consecutive cohort of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery was prospectively analyzed with regards to the surgery's compliance with the ERAS protocol. The reason for every single protocol deviation was documented and the decision was categorized based on whether it was medically justified or not. RESULTS: During the 8-month study period, 76 patients were included. The overall compliance with 22 ERAS items was 76% (96% in the preoperative, 82% in the perioperative, and 63% in the postoperative period). The decision to deviate from the clinical pathway was mainly a medical decision, while patients and nurses were responsible in 26 and 14% of the cases, respectively. However, reasons for non-compliance were medically justified in 78% of the study participants. CONCLUSION: 'Non-compliance' with the ERAS protocol was observed mostly in the postoperative period. Most deviations from the pathway were decided by doctors and in a majority of cases it appeared that they were due to a medical necessity rather than non-compliance. However, almost a quarter of deviations that were absolutely required are still amenable to improvement.

Enhanced recovery implementation in colorectal surgery-temporary or persistent improvement?

PURPOSE: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) implementation has proven to reduce complication rate and length of hospital stay. Little is known about the sustainability of these results over time. The study aim was to assess the application of ERAS pathway over the first 4 years after initial implementation. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed data collected prospectively from 482 consecutive elective colorectal patients operated in 2011 during the ERAS implementation process (n = 66), and after initial implementation in 2012 (n = 136), 2013 (n = 152), and 2014 (n = 128). Auditing ERAS was appraised from different perspectives: adherence with the ERAS protocol, clinical outcomes, and functional recovery. Patients were compared by year. RESULTS: The groups were similar in terms of demographics and surgical strategies. Length of stay remained stable at 7 days without significant variation over time (p = 0.741). The 30-day complications and readmission rates were not statistically different (respectively p = 0.068 and p = 0.639). There was also no difference in functional recovery, more particularly, first flatus occurred at day 2 (p = 0.177), pain was adequately controlled with oral analgesics at day 2 (p = 0.111), and patients were mobilized more than 4 h the first postoperative day in more than 60 % of cases (p = 0.343). Overall adherence with the ERAS pathway was 73 % during implementation and, respectively, 73 and 77 % for 2012 and 2013 after initial implementation (p = 0.614). A significant decrease between 2013 (77 %) and 2014 (73 %) was observed (p = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: Application of the institutional ERAS pathway could be maintained in the first 4 years after implementation leading to sustained improved functional recovery and clinical outcome.

Implementation of cardiac enhanced recovery after surgery at Lausanne University Hospital, our roadbook to certification.

OBJECTIVES: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multidisciplinary, patient-centred approach aimed at expediting recovery, improving clinical outcomes, and reducing healthcare costs. Initially developed for colorectal surgery, ERAS principles have been successfully applied across various surgical specialties, including cardiac surgery. This study outlines the implementation and certification process of the ERAS program in a tertiary cardiac surgical centre within the Heart-Vessel Department at Lausanne University Hospital. METHODS: The implementation involved forming a multidisciplinary team, including cardiac surgeons, anaesthesiologists, intensivists, a cardiologist, clinical nurse specialists and physiotherapists. The ERAS nurse coordinator played a central role in organizing meetings, promoting the program, developing protocols, and collecting data. The certification process required adherence to ERAS guidelines, structured training and external evaluation. Key phases included pre-ERAS data collection, protocol dissemination, inclusion of the 1st patients, followed by analysis and full implementation. RESULTS: Achieving certification required maintaining a compliance rate of over 70% with established protocols. The process involved overcoming various barriers, such as inconsistent practices and the need for multidisciplinary collaboration. In this paper, we provide some solutions to these challenges, including team education, regular meetings and continuous feedback loops. Preliminary data from the initial cohort showed improvements in early mobilization, opioid use, respiratory complications and shorter hospital stays. CONCLUSIONS: The successful implementation of the ERAS program at our institution demonstrates the feasibility and benefits of a structured, multidisciplinary approach in cardiac surgery. Continuous self-assessment and adherence to guidelines are essential for sustained improvement in patient outcomes and healthcare efficiency.

Impact of staffing a surgical intermediate care unit with a critical care specialist.

AIM: To assess the impact of reorganising an 11-bed surgical intermediate care unit (IMCU) from an open to a semi-closed system in a Swiss University Hospital by adding a critical care specialist (CCS). METHODS: This was a cohort study including adult IMCU patients enrolled in an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol in the Department of Visceral Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital, from 1 February 2014 to 31 January 2016. Medical supervision by a CCS was implemented on 1 February 2015. RESULTS: Introduction of a CCS in a surgical IMCU significantly reduced intensive care unit length of stay (p = 0.005) and potentially preventable operation (p = 0.04) for patients undergoing oesophageal surgery. A CCS in IMCU also proved to significantly reduce readmission in IMCU for hepatic surgery patients (p = 0.04). For other sub-specialties (colorectal, pancreatic and gastric bypass surgery) no significant difference could be found. CONCLUSIONS: Reorganisation of a surgical IMCU from an open to a semi-closed system by implementing supervision by a CCS decreased length of stay and complications for the most fragile surgical patients (oesophageal and hepatic patients) after 12 months of implementation.

Comparison of Surveillance of Surgical Site Infections by a National Surveillance Program and by Institutional Audit.

BACKGROUND: Reported incidence of surgical site infections (SSI) after colonic surgery varies widely. These variations depend not only on patient- and surgery-related parameters but are influenced by type and quality of follow-up. The aim of the study was to compare SSI assessed by two independent prospective surveillance systems, a national surveillance program based on recommendations of the National Healthcare Safety Network (Swissnoso) versus an international audit system, the ERAS® Interactive Audit System (EIAS; Encare, Stockholm, Sweden). METHODS: Comparative study of a consecutive cohort of colonic resections at a single institution from September 2015 to March 2017. Independent prospective SSI monitoring was available from Swissnoso and EIAS. Inter-observer reliability was calculated using Cohen k. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EIAS in assessing SSI was compared with Swissnoso, considered as gold standard. RESULTS: The final sample included 143 patients. Of these, 136 (95.1%) were classified into the same category by both systems, identifying 17 patients (12.5%) with SSI and 119 patients (87.5%) without SSI, respectively. Discrepant results were found for the remaining seven patients (4.9%) with four SSI categorization according to Swissnoso but not EIAS, and three SSI categorization in EIAS but not in Swissnoso; all miscategorized patients presented superficial SSI. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EIAS for SSI recording was 81%, 97.5%, and 95.1%, respectively. Inter-observer agreement was high (Cohen k value of 0.801, p < 0.001). Case-by-case analysis of discrepant findings revealed mainly discrepant interpretation of clinical symptoms and erroneous labeling of non-procedure-related infections. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical site infection recording by two independent systems showed high concordance and good inter-rater reliability.

Feasibility of early postoperative mobilisation after colorectal surgery: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guidelines advocate early postoperative mobilisation to counteract catabolic changes due to immobilisation and maintain muscle strength. The present study aimed to assess compliance to postoperative mobilisation according to ERAS recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study on consecutive colorectal surgical procedures treated within an established ERAS protocol within a single center between May 2011 and May 2017. Demographics, surgical details, ERAS related items and surgical outcome were prospectively assessed in a dedicated database and compared between ambulant patients (at least 6 h out of bed at postoperative day (POD) 1) vs. patients not meeting the target (delayed mobilisation). Risk factors for decreased postoperative mobilisation were identified through multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: 1170 patients were retained. 676 patients (58%) did not mobilise as recommended by ERAS protocol at POD1. Emergency operation (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.40; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.18-0.91, p = 0.028), age > 70 years (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.47-1.00, p = 0.050) and intraoperative total fluids > 2000 mL (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.37-0.93, p = 0.025) were independent risk factors for delayed mobilisation. Patients with delayed mobilisation had significantly more overall (Clavien grade IV) (55% vs. 29%, p=<0.001), major (Clavien grade IIIb-V) (16% vs. 7%, p=<0.001) and respiratory (12% vs. 4%, p=<0.001) complications, as well as longer length of stay (12 ±â€¯14 vs. 6±7days, p=<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: More than half of patients did not mobilise as recommended by ERAS guidelines. Emergency surgery, advanced age and fluid overload were independent risk factors for delayed mobilisation, which was associated with increased postoperative complications.

Impact of weekday surgery on application of enhanced recovery pathway: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol compliance and clinical outcomes depending on the weekday of surgery. SETTINGS: Cohort of consecutive non-selected patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery from January 2012 to March 2015. This retrospective analysis of our prospective database compared patients operated early in the week (Monday and Tuesday) with patients operated in the second half (late: Thursday, Friday). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Compliance with the ERAS protocol, functional recovery, complications and length of stay. RESULTS: Demographic and surgical details were similar between the early (n=352) and late groups (n=204). Overall compliance with the ERAS protocol was 78% vs 76% for the early and late groups, respectively (p=0.009). Significant differences were notably prolonged urinary drainage and intravenous fluid infusion in the late group. Complication rates and length of stay, however, were not different between surgery on Monday or Tuesday and surgery on Thursday or Friday. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the ERAS protocol showed only minor differences for patients operated on early or late during the week, and clinical outcomes were similar. A fully implemented ERAS programme appears to work also over the weekend.

The impact of an enhanced recovery pathway on nursing workload: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The importance of nursing for surgical patients has been frequently underestimated. The success of enhanced recovery programs after surgery (ERAS) depends on preferably complete fulfillment of the protocol and nurses are an important part of it. Due to the additional nursing action required, such protocols are suspected to increase the nursing workload. The aim of the present study was to observe and measure objectively nursing workload before, during and after systematic implementation of a comprehensive enhanced recovery pathway in colorectal surgery. METHODS: The program ERAS was introduced systematically in our tertiary academic centre 2011, since then our experience is based on more than 1500 ERAS patients. Nursing workload was prospectively assessed for all patients on a routine basis by means of a standardized and validated point system (PRN). In a retrospective cohort study, we compared nursing workload based on prospective data before, during and after ERAS implementation and correlated nursing workload to the compliance with the ERAS protocol. RESULTS: The study cohort included 50 patients before ERAS implementation (2010) and 69 (2011) and 148 (2012) consecutive patients after implementation; the baseline characteristics of the 3 groups were similar. Mean PRN values were 61.2 ± 19.7 per day in 2010 and decreased to 52.3 ± 13.7 (P = 0.005) and 51.6 ± 18.6 (P < 0.002) in 2011 and 2012, respectively. Increasing compliance with the ERAS protocol was significantly correlated to decreasing nursing workload (ρ = -0.42; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nursing workload is--against a common belief--decreased by systematic implementation of enhance recovery protocol. The higher the compliance with the pathway, the lower the burden for the nurses!