D Martin1, D Roulin1, F Grass1, V Addor1, O Ljungqvist2, N Demartines3, M Hübner1. 1. Department of Visceral Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland. 2. Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Health and Medical Sciences, Department of Surgery, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden. 3. Department of Visceral Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland. Electronic address: demartines@chuv.ch.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The existence of enhanced recovery specific guidelines (ERAS) is not enough to change patient management practice since many barriers exist to successful ERAS implementation. The present survey aimed to analyse motivations for implementation as well as encountered difficulties and challenges. Further, relevance and importance of perioperative care items and postoperative recovery targets were assessed. METHODS: A multicentre qualitative study was conducted between August and December 2016 among surgeons, anaesthesiologists and nurses from implemented ERAS centres in Switzerland (n = 16) and Sweden (n = 14). An online survey (31 closed questions) was sent by email, with reminders at 4, 8 and 12 weeks. RESULTS: Seventy-seven out of 146 experts completed the survey (response rate 52.7%). Main motivations to implement ERAS were the expectation to reduce complications (91%), higher patient satisfaction (73%) and shorter hospital stay (62%). The application of ERAS program represented major changes in clinical practice for 57% of participants without significant differences between various specialities (surgeons: 63%, nurses: 63%, anaesthesiologists: 36%, p = 0.185). The most important barriers for straightforward implementation were time restraints (69%), opposing colleagues (68%) and logistical reasons (66%). The 3 most frequently cited patient-related barriers to adopt ERAS were opposing personality (52%), co-morbidities (49%) and language barriers (31%). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing ERAS care into practice was challenging and required important changes in clinical practice for all involved specialities. Main reasons for implementation were the expectation to reduce complications and hospital stay with improved patients' satisfaction. Main barriers were time restraints, reluctance to change and logistics.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The existence of enhanced recovery specific guidelines (ERAS) is not enough to change patient management practice since many barriers exist to successful ERAS implementation. The present survey aimed to analyse motivations for implementation as well as encountered difficulties and challenges. Further, relevance and importance of perioperative care items and postoperative recovery targets were assessed. METHODS: A multicentre qualitative study was conducted between August and December 2016 among surgeons, anaesthesiologists and nurses from implemented ERAS centres in Switzerland (n = 16) and Sweden (n = 14). An online survey (31 closed questions) was sent by email, with reminders at 4, 8 and 12 weeks. RESULTS: Seventy-seven out of 146 experts completed the survey (response rate 52.7%). Main motivations to implement ERAS were the expectation to reduce complications (91%), higher patient satisfaction (73%) and shorter hospital stay (62%). The application of ERAS program represented major changes in clinical practice for 57% of participants without significant differences between various specialities (surgeons: 63%, nurses: 63%, anaesthesiologists: 36%, p = 0.185). The most important barriers for straightforward implementation were time restraints (69%), opposing colleagues (68%) and logistical reasons (66%). The 3 most frequently cited patient-related barriers to adopt ERAS were opposing personality (52%), co-morbidities (49%) and language barriers (31%). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing ERAS care into practice was challenging and required important changes in clinical practice for all involved specialities. Main reasons for implementation were the expectation to reduce complications and hospital stay with improved patients' satisfaction. Main barriers were time restraints, reluctance to change and logistics.
Authors: C van Beekum; B Stoffels; M von Websky; J-P Ritz; B Stinner; S Post; W Schwenk; J C Kalff; T O Vilz Journal: Chirurg Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 0.955
Authors: Elise Taylor Bernard; Daniel L Davenport; Courtney M Collins; Bethany A Benton; Andrew C Bernard Journal: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Date: 2018-12-30
Authors: R van Zelm; E Coeckelberghs; W Sermeus; A Wolthuis; L Bruyneel; M Panella; K Vanhaecht Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Eliza W Beal; Joshua-Paolo C Reyes; Zachary Denham; Mahmoud Abdel-Rasoul; Eyad Rasoul; Michelle L Humeidan Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2021-06-18 Impact factor: 1.889
Authors: Tomasz Stefura; Oksana Skomarovska; Michał Wysocki; Michał Janik; Marta Krzysztofik; Maciej Walędziak; Michał Pędziwiatr; Piotr Kowalewski; Piotr Małczak; Katarzyna Bartosiak; Mateusz Rubinkiewicz; Michał Orłowski; Maciej Matłok; Mateusz Wierdak; Katarzyna Major; Piotr Myśliwiec; Jacek Szeliga; Andrzej Budzyński; Piotr Major Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne Date: 2019-01-18 Impact factor: 1.195