Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BMJ Qual Saf ; 33(6): 363-374, 2024 May 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38423752

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are known to potentially improve the management and outcomes of patients undergoing colorectal surgery, with limited evidence of their implementation in hospital networks and in a large population. We aimed to assess the impact of the implementation of an ERAS protocol in colorectal cancer surgery in the entire region of Piemonte, Italy, supported by an audit and feedback (A&F) intervention. METHODS: A large, stepped wedge, cluster randomised trial enrolled patients scheduled for elective surgery at 29 general surgery units (clusters). At baseline (first 3 months), standard care was continued in all units. Thereafter, four groups of clusters began to adopt the ERAS protocol successively. By the end of the study, each cluster had a period in which standard care was maintained (control) and a period in which the protocol was applied (experimental). ERAS implementation was supported by initial training and A&F initiatives. The primary endpoint was length of stay (LOS) without outliers (>94th percentile), and the secondary endpoints were outliers for LOS, postoperative medical and surgical complications, quality of recovery and compliance with ERAS items. RESULTS: Of 2626 randomised patients, 2397 were included in the LOS analysis (1060 in the control period and 1337 in the experimental period). The mean LOS without outliers was 8.5 days during the control period (SD 3.9) and 7.5 (SD 3.5) during the experimental one. The adjusted difference between the two periods was a reduction of -0.58 days (95% CI -1.07, -0.09; p=0.021). The compliance with ERAS items increased from 52.4% to 67.3% (estimated absolute difference +13%; 95% CI 11.4%, 14.7%). No difference in the occurrence of complications was evidenced (OR 1.22; 95% CI 0.89, 1.68). CONCLUSION: Implementation of the ERAS protocol for colorectal cancer, supported by A&F approach, led to a substantial improvement in compliance and a reduction in LOS, without meaningful effects on complications. Trial registration number NCT04037787.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Recuperación Mejorada Después de la Cirugía , Tiempo de Internación , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Femenino , Masculino , Anciano , Recuperación Mejorada Después de la Cirugía/normas , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Italia , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Auditoría Médica , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos
2.
BMJ Open ; 11(6): e047491, 2021 06 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34083345

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The ERAS protocol (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) is a multimodal pathway aimed to reduce surgical stress and to allow a rapid postoperative recovery. Application of the ERAS protocol to colorectal cancer surgery has been limited to a minority of hospitals in Italy. To promote the systematic adoption of ERAS in the entire regional hospital network in Piemonte an Audit and Feedback approach (A&F) has been adopted together with a cluster randomised trial to estimate the true impact of the protocol on a large, unselected population. METHODS: A multicentre stepped wedge cluster randomised trial is designed for comparison between standard perioperative management and the management according to the ERAS protocol. The primary outcome is the length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes are: incidence of postoperative complications, time to patients' recovery, control of pain and patients' satisfaction. With an A&F approach the adherence to the ERAS items is monitored through a dedicated area in the study web site. The study includes 28 surgical centres, stratified by activity volume and randomly divided into four groups. Each group is randomly assigned to a different activation period of the ERAS protocol. There are four activation periods, one every 3 months. However, the planned calendar and the total duration of the study have been extended by 6 months due to the COVID-19 pandemic.The expected sample size of about 2200 patients has a high statistical power (98%) to detect a reduction of LOS of 1 day and to estimate clinically meaningful changes in the other endpoints. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by the Ethical Committee of the coordinating centre and by all participating centres. Study results will be timely circulated within the hospital network and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04037787.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Recuperación Mejorada Después de la Cirugía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Retroalimentación , Humanos , Italia , Tiempo de Internación , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Pandemias , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , SARS-CoV-2
3.
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol ; 31(3): 349-53, 2015.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26330714

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We conducted a prospective study to examine the local anesthetic (LA) spread and the effectiveness for surgical anesthesia of ultrasound (US)-guided rectus sheath block (RSB) in adult patients undergoing umbilical hernia repair. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty patients received at T-10 level a bilateral US-guided injection of 20 mL levobupivacaine 0.375% + epinephrine 5 µg/mL behind the rectus muscle to detach it from its sheath. Anesthetic spread into the rectus sheath was evaluated ultrasonographically at T-9 and T-11 levels and scored from 0 to 4. The RSB was defined effective for surgical anesthesia if it was able to guarantee an anesthetic level sufficient for surgery without any mepivacaine supplementation. RESULTS: Overall, the block was effective for surgical anesthesia in 53.3% of patients (95% confidence interval, ±17.8). In the remaining patients, anesthesia supplementation was needed at cutaneous incision, whereas manipulation of the muscle and fascial planes was painless. No patients required general anesthesia. LA spreads as advocated (to T-9 and to T-11 bilaterally = spread score 4) in 8/30 patients (26.6%); in these cases, the block was 75% effective for surgery. The anesthetic spread was most negatively influenced by increased body mass index. Postoperative analgesia was excellent in 97% of patients. CONCLUSION: Use of RSB as an anesthetic management of umbilical herniorrhaphy is recommended only with anesthetic supplementation at the incision site.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...