PURPOSE: Clinical pathways (CPs) are increasingly used to improve quality of care. However, evidence if such improvements are also feasible in fast-track colorectal surgery is lacking. This study evaluates effects of a CP for fast-track colonic resections with respect to process and outcome quality. METHODS: We compared 78 consecutive patients undergoing colonic resections in 2008 and being treated with a CP (CP group) with 133 consecutive patients treated without CP between 2006 and 2007 (pre-CP group). Indicators for process quality were epidural catheter placement, postoperative mobilisation, resumption of solid diet, Foley catheter removal and length of stay. Outcome quality was measured through morbidity, mortality, re-operations and readmissions. RESULTS: In the CP group, patients received epidural analgesia significantly more often (87.2% vs. 75.2%; p =0.04), were mobilized (38.9% vs. 20.6% on the day of surgery; p = 0.03) and resumed a solid diet earlier (60.5% vs. 49.6% on day 1; p = 0.002). Foley catheter removal and length of stay did not differ between the groups. There were no significant differences regarding morbidity (28.2% vs. 32.3%), mortality (1.2% vs. 2.3%), re-operations (6.4% vs. 9.0%) and readmissions (2.6% vs. 3.8%). CONCLUSIONS: After CP implementation for fast-track surgery of the colon, several indicators of process quality improved while others such as length of stay remained unaltered. There were no significant changes in outcome parameters. CPs are a viable instrument to improve specific aspects of perioperative process management, but their selective benefits have to be critically weighed against the infrastructural and personal efforts required for design and implementation.
PURPOSE: Clinical pathways (CPs) are increasingly used to improve quality of care. However, evidence if such improvements are also feasible in fast-track colorectal surgery is lacking. This study evaluates effects of a CP for fast-track colonic resections with respect to process and outcome quality. METHODS: We compared 78 consecutive patients undergoing colonic resections in 2008 and being treated with a CP (CP group) with 133 consecutive patients treated without CP between 2006 and 2007 (pre-CP group). Indicators for process quality were epidural catheter placement, postoperative mobilisation, resumption of solid diet, Foley catheter removal and length of stay. Outcome quality was measured through morbidity, mortality, re-operations and readmissions. RESULTS: In the CP group, patients received epidural analgesia significantly more often (87.2% vs. 75.2%; p =0.04), were mobilized (38.9% vs. 20.6% on the day of surgery; p = 0.03) and resumed a solid diet earlier (60.5% vs. 49.6% on day 1; p = 0.002). Foley catheter removal and length of stay did not differ between the groups. There were no significant differences regarding morbidity (28.2% vs. 32.3%), mortality (1.2% vs. 2.3%), re-operations (6.4% vs. 9.0%) and readmissions (2.6% vs. 3.8%). CONCLUSIONS: After CP implementation for fast-track surgery of the colon, several indicators of process quality improved while others such as length of stay remained unaltered. There were no significant changes in outcome parameters. CPs are a viable instrument to improve specific aspects of perioperative process management, but their selective benefits have to be critically weighed against the infrastructural and personal efforts required for design and implementation.
Authors: J Maessen; C H C Dejong; J Hausel; J Nygren; K Lassen; J Andersen; A G H Kessels; A Revhaug; H Kehlet; O Ljungqvist; K C H Fearon; M F von Meyenfeldt Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: José V Roig; Rodolfo Rodríguez-Carrillo; Juan García-Armengol; Francisco L Villalba; Antonio Salvador; Cristina Sancho; Pilar Albors; Francisco Puchades; Carlos Fuster Journal: Cir Esp Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 1.653
Authors: Arman Kahokehr; Tarik Sammour; Kamran Zargar-Shoshtari; Lisa Thompson; Andrew G Hill Journal: Int J Surg Date: 2008-12-03 Impact factor: 6.071
Authors: Matthias H M Schwarzbach; Ulrich Ronellenfitsch; Qian Wang; Eric D Rössner; Christof Denz; Stefan Post; Peter Hohenberger Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2009-06-10 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Sebastiaan W Polle; Jan Wind; Jan W Fuhring; Jan Hofland; Dirk J Gouma; Willem A Bemelman Journal: Dig Surg Date: 2007-09-13 Impact factor: 2.588
Authors: Brian M Block; Spencer S Liu; Andrew J Rowlingson; Anne R Cowan; John A Cowan; Christopher L Wu Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-11-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Antonio Arroyo; José Manuel Ramirez; Daniel Callejo; Xavier Viñas; Sergio Maeso; Roger Cabezali; Elena Miranda Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2012-05-27 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Marion van der Kolk; Mark van den Boogaard; Femke Becking-Verhaar; Hettie Custers; Hans van der Hoeven; Peter Pickkers; Kees van Laarhoven Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-06-06 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Vijaya Gottumukkala; Thomas A Aloia; Ryan W Day; Sharon Fielder; John Calhoun; Henrik Kehlet Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Patrick Téoule; Laura Römling; Matthias Schwarzbach; Emrullah Birgin; Felix Rückert; Torsten J Wilhelm; Marco Niedergethmann; Stefan Post; Nuh N Rahbari; Christoph Reißfelder; Ulrich Ronellenfitsch Journal: Ther Clin Risk Manag Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 2.423