Literature DB >> 23850899

Can enhanced recovery pathways improve outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy? Cohort control study.

Wai Yoong1, Viswa Sivashanmugarajan2, Sophie Relph2, Alice Bell2, Elisabeth Fajemirokun3, Timothy Davies3, Kerry Munro2, Kelly Chigwidden2, Frances Evan2, Wasim Lodhi2.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of enhanced recovery pathway implementation on patient outcomes after vaginal hysterectomy (VH) performed to treat benign indications.
DESIGN: Case-control study examining outcome measures including length of stay, pain scores, postoperative morbidity, and readmission rates after implementation of the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) program for VH (Canadian Task Force classification II).
SETTING: Teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Fifty patients who underwent VH after implementation of ERAS were compared with 50 control patients before ERAS. Patients were matched for age, indication for surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, and surgeon. INTERVENTION: ERAS pathway.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Length of stay, percentage of patients discharged within 24 hours, use of urinary catheter and vaginal packing, and readmission rates were determined. Perioperative expenditures were compared, and cost-effectiveness of ERAS was assessed. Median patient vs control age (49.0 vs 51.0 years), parity (2.0 vs 2.0), and body mass index (26.5 vs 28.3) were statistically comparable. After ERAS implementation, the median length of stay was reduced by 51.6% (22.0 vs 45.5 hours; p < .01), and the percentage of patients discharged within 24 hours was increased by 5-fold (78.0 vs 15.6%; p < .05). Frequency of catheter use (82.0% vs 95.6%) and use of vaginal packing (52.0 vs 82.2%) were significantly lower in the post-ERAS group, and these devices were removed earlier (14.5 vs 23.7 hours and 16.0 vs 23.0 hours, respectively; p < .05 in all cases). Attendance in the Accident and Emergency Department (12.0% vs 0%; p > .05) and inpatient readmission rate (4.0% vs 0%; p > .05) were similar in both groups. Despite having to start a "gynecology school" and employ a specialist Enhanced Recovery nurse, a cost savings of 9.25% per patient was demonstrated.
CONCLUSION: The ERAS program in benign VH reduces length of stay by 51.6% and enables more women to be discharged within 24 hours, with no increase in patient readmissions rates.
Copyright © 2014 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Enhanced recovery; Fast-track surgery; Vaginal hysterectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23850899     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.06.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol        ISSN: 1553-4650            Impact factor:   4.137


  17 in total

1.  Predictors of length of stay after urogynecological surgery at a tertiary referral center.

Authors:  Louise-Helene Gagnon; Selphee Tang; Erin Brennand
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  A call for new standard of care in perioperative gynecologic oncology practice: Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs.

Authors:  Ester Miralpeix; Alpa M Nick; Larissa A Meyer; Juan Cata; Javier Lasala; Gabriel E Mena; Vijaya Gottumukkala; Maria Iniesta-Donate; Gloria Salvo; Pedro T Ramirez
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2016-03-09       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 3.  A meta-analysis of fast track surgery for patients with gastric cancer undergoing gastrectomy.

Authors:  S Chen; Z Zou; F Chen; Z Huang; G Li
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 4.  Review of enhanced recovery programs in benign gynecologic surgery.

Authors:  Elisa R Trowbridge; Caitlin N Dreisbach; Bethany M Sarosiek; Catherine Page Dunbar; Sarah Larkin Evans; Lee Anne Hahn; Kathie L Hullfish
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-09-04       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Prediction of early discharge after gynaecological oncology surgery within ERAS.

Authors:  Eric Lambaudie; Jérome Mathis; Christophe Zemmour; Camille Jauffret-Fara; Elie Toni Mikhael; Camille Pouliquen; Renaud Sabatier; Clément Brun; Marion Faucher; Djamel Mokart; Gilles Houvenaeghel
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  The effect of enhanced recovery after minimally invasive esophagectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Yaxing Shen; Xiaosang Chen; Junyi Hou; Youwen Chen; Yong Fang; Zhanggang Xue; Xavier Benoit D'Journo; Robert J Cerfolio; Hiran C Fernando; Alfonso Fiorelli; Alessandro Brunelli; Jing Cang; Lijie Tan; Hao Wang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Vaginal packing after vaginal hysterectomy: systematic review and recommendations.

Authors:  Oriol Porta-Roda; Ariana Cornet-Cortada; Albert Font-Vilamitjana; Eva Huguet-Galofré; Judith Lleberia-Juanós; Ivan Solà-Arnau
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 1.932

Review 8.  Enhanced Recovery Pathways in Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology.

Authors:  Emma L Barber; Linda Van Le
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Surv       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 2.347

9.  Enhanced recovery program for minimally invasive and vaginal urogynecologic surgery.

Authors:  Elisa Rodriguez Trowbridge; Sarah L Evans; Bethany M Sarosiek; Susan C Modesitt; Dana L Redick; Mohamed Tiouririne; Robert H Thiele; Traci L Hedrick; Kathie L Hullfish
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 2.894

10.  Adoption of enhanced recovery after laparotomy in gynecologic oncology.

Authors:  Ana Sofia Ore; Matthew A Shear; Fong W Liu; John L Dalrymple; Christopher S Awtrey; Leslie Garrett; Hannah Stack-Dunnbier; Michele R Hacker; Katharine McKinley Esselen
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 3.437

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.