Implementing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for hysterectomy in a hospital network with audit and feedback: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of implementing the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol in patients undergoing elective hysterectomy in a network of regional hospitals, supported by an intensive audit-and-feedback (A&F) approach. DESIGN: A multi-centre, stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04063072). SETTING: Gynaecological units in the Piemonte region, Italy. POPULATION: Patients undergoing elective hysterectomy, either for cancer or for benign conditions. METHODS: Twenty-three units (clusters), stratified by surgical volume, were randomised into four sequences. At baseline (first 3 months), standard care was continued in all units. Subsequently, the four sequences implemented the ERAS protocol successively every 3 months, after specific training. By the end of the study, each unit had a period in which standard care was maintained (control) and a period in which the protocol, supported by feedback, was applied (experimental). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Length of hospital stay (LOS), without outliers (>98th percentile). RESULTS: Between September 2019 and May 2021, 2086 patients were included in the main analysis with an intention-to-treat approach: 1104 (53%) in the control period and 982 (47%) in the ERAS period. Compliance with the ERAS protocol increased from 60% in the control period to 76% in the experimental period, with an adjusted absolute difference of +13.3% (95% CI 11.6% to 15.0%). LOS, moving from 3.5 to 3.2 days, did not show a significant reduction (-0.12 days; 95% CI -0.30 to 0.07 days). No difference was observed in the occurrence of complications. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the ERAS protocol for hysterectomy at the regional level, supported by an A&F approach, resulted in a substantial improvement in compliance, but without meaningful effects on LOS and complications. This study confirms the effectiveness of A&F in promoting important innovations in an entire hospital network and suggests the need of a higher compliance with the ERAS protocol to obtain valuable improvements in clinical outcomes.

Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for colorectal cancer in a regional hospital network supported by audit and feedback: a stepped wedge, cluster randomised trial.

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.

Implementation of the ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) protocol for hysterectomy in the Piedmont Region with an audit&feedback approach: Study protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. A study of the EASY-NET project.

INTRODUCTION: ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) is a perioperative program combining multiple evidence-based interventions designed to reduce the surgical stress response. Despite the publication of dedicated guidelines, ERAS application to gynecologic surgery outside clinical studies has been slow and fragmented. To promote the systematic adoption of the ERAS program in the entire regional hospital network in Piedmont an Audit-and-Feedback approach (A&F) has been adopted within a cluster randomized controlled trial, aiming to estimate the true impact of the protocol on a large, unselected population. METHODS: The study protocol provides for a multicenter stepped wedge cluster randomized trial, focused on women undergoing an hysterectomy, for comparison between standard perioperative management and perioperative management according to the ERAS protocol. The primary outcome is the length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes are: post-operative complications, quality-of-recovery at 24-hours after surgery, 30-day readmissions, patients' satisfaction, healthcare costs. The compliance to all the ERAS items is monitored with an A&F approach. All the gynecologic units of Piedmont hospitals are involved and all the patients hospitalized for elective hysterectomy in the period of the study are included. Centers, stratified by surgical volume and randomly assigned to four groups, are randomly ordered to activate the ERAS protocol in four periods, every three months. The planned calendar and the total duration of the study have been extended for six months due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The expected sample size of about 2400 patients has a high statistical power (99%) to detect a reduction of LOS of 1 day (effect size 0.5) and to estimate clinically meaningful changes in the other study endpoints. The study protocol has been approved by the Ethical Committee of all participating centers. Study results will be timely circulated within the hospital network and published in peer-reviewed journals. CONCLUSION: Results are expected to demonstrate positive clinical outcomes of the ERAS protocol even when its implementation is directed towards an entire regional network of gynecologic units, and not only towards selected and highly motivated centers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04063072.

Factor structure of post-operative quality of recovery questionnaire (QoR-15): An Italian adaptation and validation.

Background: The Quality of Recovery questionnaire (QoR-15) is an English instrument for measuring quality of recovery in surgical patients, not yet translated and validated in Italian when the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Piemonte studies were planned. Objective: To produce the Italian version of the QoR-15 questionnaire, to evaluate its factorial structure and to assess the invariance between two types of surgery. Methods: The Italian version (QoR-15I) was obtained translating and adapting the original version to the Italian context. The validation was performed suppling the QoR-15I to 3,784 patients enrolled in two parallel stepped wedge cluster randomised trials (ERAS Colon-rectum Piemonte; ERAS Gyneco Piemonte). The factor structure and its invariance between types of surgery was tested using confirmatory bifactor model and multi-group analysis. Comparative fit index (CFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) fit indices and their changes between nested models were used to assess the factor structure and the invariance. Results: The bifactor model showed good fit (RMSEA = 0.049, CFI =0.957, SRMR = 0.036) and provided a general recovery factor and two specific factors for physical and mental recovery. Eighty-four percent of the common variance is attributable to the general factor, and thus the QoR-15I is sufficiently 'one-dimensional' with an adequate reliability (ωh = 0.70). The ωs values for the physical and mental recovery factors were 0.01 and 0.13, respectively. Multigroup analysis supported configural (RMSEA = 0.053, CFI = 0.950, SRMR = 0.035) and metric invariance (ΔRMSEA = -0.004; ΔCFI = -0.002; ΔSRMR = 0.014), whereas the intercept constraint was removed from item 15 to obtain partial scalar invariance (ΔRMSEA = 0.002; ΔCFI = 0.007; ΔSRMR = 0.004). Construct validity was supported by a negative association of QoR-15I scores with all variables related to worse patient condition and more complex surgery. Conclusion: Our results support the use of the QoR-15I as a valid, reliable, and clinically feasible tool for measuring the quality of recovery after surgery. The results of the confirmatory factor analyses suggest that a unique recovery score can be calculated and support measurement invariance of the QOR-15I across the two type of surgery, suggesting that the questionnaire has the same meaning and the same measurement parameters in colorectal and gynaecologic patients.

Implementation of the ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) protocol for colorectal cancer surgery in the Piemonte Region with an Audit and Feedback approach: study protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial: a study of the EASY-NET project.

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.

Effects of a Video-Based Preoperative Educational Intervention Plus Nurse-Led Reinforcement Discussion on Knowledge, Self-Efficacy, and Resilience in Patients Undergoing Major Surgery.

This study aimed to verify the feasibility of a video-based preoperative educational intervention plus one-to-one, nurse-led reinforcement discussion in patients undergoing elective major surgery and to assess the impact of this combined intervention on patient- and nurse-perceived patient knowledge, self-efficacy, and resilience. Patients received written material at pre-admission and were offered the intervention at admission. Patients reported their knowledge and self-efficacy at pre-admission and after the intervention, and resilience at pre-admission and discharge. Nurses assessed patients' knowledge and self-efficacy after the intervention. In all, 88/97 (90.7%) patients completed the intervention. The 80 patients with complete data reported a significant increase in their knowledge (p < .001) and self-efficacy (p < .001), but no difference in resilience (p = .72). Nurse-perceived patient knowledge agreed with patients' perceptions (p = .57) but nurses scored patients' self-efficacy lower (p < .001). The combined intervention was feasible, and patients perceived an improvement in their knowledge and self-efficacy. Nurses' assessment partially agreed with patients' perceptions.