• Jennifer E Bergstrom, Marla E Scott, Yewande Alimi, Ting-Tai Yen, Deborah Hobson, Karime K Machado, Edward J Tanner, Amanda N Fader, Sarah M Temkin, Stephanie Wethington, Kimberly Levinson, Sam Sokolinsky, Brandyn Lau, and Rebecca L Stone.
• Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.
• Gynecol. Oncol. 2018 Jun 1; 149 (3): 554-559.

ObjectivesEnhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs are mechanisms for achieving value-based improvements in surgery. This report provides a detailed analysis of the impact of an ERAS program on patient outcomes as well as quality and safety measures during implementation on a gynecologic oncology service at a major academic medical center.MethodsA retrospective review of gynecologic oncology patients undergoing elective laparotomy during the implementation phase of an ERAS program (January 2016 through December 2016) was performed. Patient demographics, surgical variables, postoperative outcomes, and adherence to core safety measures, including antimicrobial and venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, were compared to a historical patient cohort (January 2015 through December 2015). Statistical analyses were performed using t-tests, Wilcoxon rank sum tests, and Chi squared tests.ResultsThe inaugural 109 ERAS program participants were compared to a historical patient cohort (n=158). There was no difference in BMI, race, malignancy, or complexity of procedure between cohorts. ERAS patients required less narcotics (70.7 vs 127.4, p=0.007, oral morphine equivalents) and PCA use (32.1% vs. 50.6%, p=0.002). Despite this substantial reduction in narcotics, ERAS patients did not report more pain and in fact reported significantly less pain by postoperative day 3. There were no differences in length of stay (5days), complication rates (13.8% vs. 20.3%, p=0.17) or 30-day readmission rates (9.5 vs 11.9%, p=0.54) between ERAS and historical patients, respectively. Compliance with antimicrobial prophylaxis was 97.2%. However, 33.9% of ERAS patients received substandard preoperative VTE prophylaxis.ConclusionsERAS program implementation resulted in reductions in narcotic requirements and PCA use without changes in length of stay or readmission rates. Compliance should be diligently audited during the implementation phase of ERAS programs, with special attention to adherence to pre-existing core safety measures.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

33 keywords...

hide…