Cost analysis of the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol applied in advanced ovarian cancer: A secondary outcome of the PROFAST trial.

INTRODUCTION: A randomised trial implementing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) for high complexity advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) surgery (PROFAST) demonstrated a reduction of median length of stay and hospital readmissions when compared to patients managed conventionally. One secondary objective was to determine if an ERAS pathway in the perioperative management of advanced ovarian cancer patients led to cost savings. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Secondary objective of a prospective randomised trial of patients with suspected or diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer allocated to conventional or ERAS perioperative management, carried out at a referral centre from June 2014 to March 2018. Treatment was determined by a computer-generated random allocation system. METHODS: Gross counting was employed to estimate the cost of hospitalisation in wards, intensive care unit (ICU) and surgical care, while micro-costing was used to obtain image and laboratory test costs. Mean costs between trial arms were considered. Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients (n = 50 ERAS group, n = 49 Conventional group) were included. Mean costs per patient were 10,719€ in the ERAS group and 11,028€ in the conventional group, leading to an average saving of 309€ per patient. These results were based on 96 patients, excluding 3 extreme outliers mainly related with very high ICU costs. Savings, which were significant for hospital ward costs (-33% total; 759€ per patient in first hospitalisation, and 914€ per partient/day of readmission) were found as robust in the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an ERAS pathway leads to cost savings when compared to conventional management after AOC surgery.

Transforming a public university hospital and its area of influence into a comprehensive resource in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The outbreak of COVID-19 has overwhelmed healthcare systems all over the world. The aim of this article is to describe the process of transforming the Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, the second largest hospital in Spain, into a COVID-19 centre coordinating response to the pandemic in its reference area. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study draws on the experience of the authors in transforming the hospital into a comprehensive resource in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The strategy is based on four central strategies: early planning, coordination of all healthcare agents in its reference area, definition of clear leadership roles, and the organisation of care based on multidisciplinary teams with minimal recruitment of new staff. RESULTS: The transformation strategy enabled the hospital to cope with the surge in patients without exceeding its capacity. During the response phases, which amounted to a period of 57 days, 3106 patients consulted the ER and 2054 were admitted, 346 of whom were treated at the ICU. To accommodate the number of adult COVID-19 patients, adult ICU availability was progressive increased by 371%, and ordinary beds increased by 240. A total of 671 staff members went on sick leave after testing positive for COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The transformation experience of the hospital provides insight into how effectively adapt the structures and functioning of large hospitals. The relevance of territorial coordination during the pandemic is stressed as an effective strategy that contributed coping the pandemic.

[Assessment model for evaluating the preparedness plan for COVID-19 in a tertiary care hospital]. / Modelo de evaluación del plan de respuesta frente a la pandemia de COVID-19 en un hospital de tercer nivel.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: During the first wave of the epidemic caused by SARS-CoV-2, hospitals have come under significant pressure. This scenario of uncertainty, low scientific evidence, and insufficient resources, has generated significant variability in practice between different health organisations. In this context, it is proposed to develop a standards-based model for the evaluation of the preparedness and response system against COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study, carried out at the University Hospital of Vall d'Hebron in Barcelona (Spain), was designed in two phases: 1) development of the standards-based model, by means of a narrative review of the literature, analysis of plans and protocols implemented in the hospital, a review process by expert professionals from the centre, and plan of action, and 2) validation of usability and usefulness of the model through self-assessment and hospital audit. RESULTS: The model contains 208 standards distributed into nine criteria: leadership and strategy; prevention and infection control; management of professionals and skills; public areas; healthcare areas; areas of support for diagnosis and treatment; logistics, technology and works; communication and patient care; and information and research systems. The evaluation achieved 85.2% compliance, with 42 areas for improvement and 96 good practices identified. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a standards-based model is a useful tool to identify areas for improvement and good practices in COVID-19 preparedness and response plans in a hospital. In the current context, it is recommended to repeat this methodology in other non-hospital and public health settings.

Modelo de evaluación del plan de respuesta frente a la pandemia de COVID-19 en un hospital de tercer nivel / Assessment model for evaluating the preparedness plan for COVID-19 in a tertiary care hospital

ANTECEDENTES Y OBJETIVO: Durante la primera onda epidémica del SARS-CoV-2, los hospitales han soportado una importante presión asistencial. Este escenario de incertidumbre, baja evidencia científica y medios insuficientes ha generado una importante variabilidad de la práctica entre diferentes centros sanitarios. En este contexto, planteamos desarrollar un modelo basado en estándares para la evaluación del sistema de preparación y respuesta frente a la COVID-19 en un hospital terciario. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: El estudio se llevó a cabo en el Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron de Barcelona en dos fases: 1) desarrollo de modelo de estándares mediante revisión narrativa de la literatura, análisis de planes y protocolos del hospital, método Delphi por profesionales expertos y plan de actualización y 2) validación de aplicabilidad y utilidad del modelo mediante autoevaluación y auditoría. RESULTADOS: El modelo consta de 208 estándares distribuidos en nueve criterios: liderazgo y estrategia; prevención y control de la infección; gestión de profesionales y competencias; áreas públicas comunes; áreas asistenciales; áreas de apoyo asistencial; logística, tecnología y obras; comunicación y atención al paciente; sistemas de información e investigación. La evaluación alcanza un 85,2% de cumplimiento, y se identifican 42 áreas de mejora y 96 buenas prácticas. CONCLUSIONES: La implementación de un modelo basado en estándares es útil para identificar áreas de mejora y buenas prácticas en los planes de preparación y respuesta frente a la COVID-19 en un hospital. En el actual contexto, proponemos la conveniencia de adaptar esta metodología a otros ámbitos de atención sanitaria no hospitalaria o de salud pública

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: During the first wave of the epidemic caused by SARS-CoV-2, hospitals have come under significant pressure. This scenario of uncertainty, low scientific evidence, and insufficient resources, has generated significant variability in practice between different health organisations. In this context, it is proposed to develop a standards-based model for the evaluation of the preparedness and response system against COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study, carried out at the University Hospital of Vall d'Hebron in Barcelona (Spain), was designed in two phases: 1) development of the standards-based model, by means of a narrative review of the literature, analysis of plans and protocols implemented in the hospital, a review process by expert professionals from the centre, and plan of action, and 2) validation of usability and usefulness of the model through self-assessment and hospital audit. RESULTS: The model contains 208 standards distributed into nine criteria: leadership and strategy; prevention and infection control; management of professionals and skills; public areas; healthcare areas; areas of support for diagnosis and treatment; logistics, technology and works; communication and patient care; and information and research systems. The evaluation achieved 85.2% compliance, with 42 areas for improvement and 96 good practices identified. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a standards-based model is a useful tool to identify areas for improvement and good practices in COVID-19 preparedness and response plans in a hospital. In the current context, it is recommended to repeat this methodology in other non-hospital and public health settings