| 1. |
- Wijk, Lena, 1971-, et al.
(författare)
-
International validation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society guidelines on enhanced recovery for gynecologic surgery
- 2019
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. - : Harcourt International Publishers. - 0002-9378 .- 1097-6868. ; 221:3, s. 237.e1-237.e11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society publishes guidelines on perioperative care, but these guidelines should be validated prospectively.OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between compliance to ERAS Gynecologic/Oncology guideline elements and postoperative outcomes in an international cohort.STUDY DESIGN: The study was comprised of 2,101 patients undergoing elective gynecologic/oncology surgery between January 2011 - November 2017 in 10 hospitals across Canada, the United States and Europe. Patient demographics, surgical/anesthesia details and ERAS protocol compliance elements (pre-, intra- and post-operative phases) were entered into the ERAS Interactive Audit System. Surgical complexity was stratified according to the Aletti scoring system (low versus medium/high). The following covariates were accounted for in the analysis: age, Body Mass Index, smoking status, presence of diabetes, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy, operating time, surgical approach (open versus minimally invasive), intra-operative blood loss, hospital and ERAS implementation status. The primary end-points were primary hospital length of stay and complications. Negative binomial regression was used to model length of stay, and logistic regression to model complications, as a function of compliance score and covariates.RESULTS: Patient demographics: median age 56 years, 35.5% obese,15% smokers, 26.7% American Society of Anesthesiologists Class III-IV. Final diagnosis was malignant in 49% of patients. Laparotomy was used in 75.9% of cases, and the remainder minimally invasive surgery. The majority of cases (86%) were of low complexity (Aletti score ≤ 3). In patients with ovarian cancer, 69.5% had a medium/high complexity surgery (Aletti score 4-11). Median length of stay was 2 days in the low- and 5 days in the medium/high-complexity group. Every unit increase in ERAS guideline score was associated with 8% (IRR: 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90 - 0.95; p<0.001)) decrease in days in hospital among low-complexity, and 12% (IRR: 0.88 (95% CI: 0.82 - 0.93; p<0.001) decrease among patients with medium/high complexity scores. For every unit increase in ERAS guideline score, the odds of total complications were estimated to be 12% lower (p<0.05) among low-complexity patients.CONCLUSION: Audit of surgical practices demonstrates that improved compliance with ERAS Gynecologic/Oncology guidelines is associated with an improvement in clinical outcomes, including length of stay, highlighting the importance of ERAS implementation.
|
|
| 2. |
- Xu, Yin, 1991-, et al.
(författare)
-
Validity of Routinely Collected Swedish Data in the International Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Database
- 2021
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Surgery. - : Springer. - 0364-2313 .- 1432-2323. ; 45:6, s. 1622-1629
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: This study aims to assess patient coverage, validity and data quality in the Swedish part of the International Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Interactive Audit System (EIAS).METHOD: All Swedish ERAS centers that recorded colorectal surgery data in EIAS between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2017, were included (N = 12). Information registered in EIAS was compared with data from electronic medical records at each hospital to assess the overall coverage of EIAS. Twenty random-selected patients from each of the contributing centers were assessed for accuracy for a set of clinically relevant variables. All patients admitted to the contributing centers were included for the assessment of rate of missing on a selection of key clinical variables.RESULTS: Eight hospitals provided complete information for the evaluation, while four hospitals only allowed assessment of coverage and missing data. The eight hospitals had an overall coverage of 98.8% in EIAS (n = 1301) and the four 86.7% (n = 811). The average agreement for the assessed postoperative outcome variables was 96.5%. The accuracy was excellent for 'length of hospital stay,' 'reoperation,' and 'any complications,' but lower for other types of complications. Only a few variables had more than 5% missing data, and missingness was associated with hospital type and size.CONCLUSION: This validation of the Swedish part of the international ERAS database suggests high patient coverage in EIAS and high agreement and limited missingness in clinically relevant variables. This validation approach or a modified version can be used for continued validation of the International ERAS database.
|
|
