Literature DB >> 34242066

Implementation of Evidence-Based Presurgical Testing Guidelines in Patients Undergoing Ambulatory Surgery for Endometrial Cancer.

Emeline M Aviki1, Sushmita B Gordhandas1, Jeena Velzen1, Michael Riley1, Beryl Manning-Geist1, Jonathan Rice1, Hallie Weiss1, Nadeem R Abu-Rustum1,2, Ginger J Gardner1,2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this quality improvement intervention was to evaluate the safety and cost savings of presurgical testing (PST) guidelines for patients undergoing hysterectomy for endometrial pathology in the ambulatory setting.
METHODS: Evidence-based presurgical testing (PST) guidelines were developed by a multidisciplinary team. These guidelines were implemented on the gynecologic surgery service of a comprehensive cancer center in January 2016. All patients with a diagnosis of endometrial pathology who underwent ambulatory surgery during the specified time periods were included in this analysis. A pre-post analysis was performed (preperiod, July 2014-December 2015; postperiod, July 2016-December 2017). Rates of completed presurgical tests and perioperative adverse events were compared between time periods. Cost savings related to the reduction in PST were calculated using the direct cost of testing and reported in percentage cost reduction.
RESULTS: A total of 749 hysterectomies were completed in the preperiod and 775 in the postperiod. After implementation of PST guidelines, complete blood counts, coagulation testing, comprehensive metabolic panels, chest x-rays, and electrocardiograms were reduced by 13.4%, 78.1%, 36.8%, 39.0%, and 15.5%, respectively (all P < .001). Rates of perioperative cardiopulmonary adverse events (0% v 0%) and hematologic adverse events (3.3% v 2.0%; P = .10) were stable between time periods. There were no deaths within 90 days of surgery. There was a 41.4% reduction in direct costs related to PST in the postperiod.
CONCLUSION: The use of evidence-based PST guidelines for patients with endometrial pathology undergoing hysterectomy in the ambulatory setting is safe and cost-effective. A multidisciplinary approach is essential for successful development and implementation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34242066      PMCID: PMC8758118          DOI: 10.1200/OP.21.00247

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract        ISSN: 2688-1527


  10 in total

1.  Unindicated preoperative testing: ASA physical status and financial implications.

Authors:  A W Vogt; L C Henson
Journal:  J Clin Anesth       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 9.452

2.  Practice advisory for preanesthesia evaluation: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Preanesthesia Evaluation.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Apfelbaum; Richard T Connis; David G Nickinovich; L Reuven Pasternak; James F Arens; Robert A Caplan; Richard T Connis; Lee A Fleisher; Richard Flowerdew; Barbara S Gold; James F Mayhew; David G Nickinovich; Linda Jo Rice; Michael F Roizen; Rebecca S Twersky
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 7.892

Review 3.  National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines on preoperative tests: the use of routine preoperative tests for elective surgery.

Authors:  T M Reynolds
Journal:  Ann Clin Biochem       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.057

4.  Preoperative testing is inconsistent with published guidelines and rarely changes management.

Authors:  Gregory L Bryson; Anna Wyand; Paul R Bragg
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 5.063

5.  Cancer Statistics, 2021.

Authors:  Rebecca L Siegel; Kimberly D Miller; Hannah E Fuchs; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 508.702

6.  Preoperative Evaluation for Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery: What Is the Best Evidence and Recommendations for Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Jessica Shields; Kimberly A Kho
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 4.137

7.  Adherence to evidence-based guidelines for preoperative testing in women undergoing gynecologic surgery.

Authors:  Caryn M St Clair; Monjri Shah; Elisabeth J Diver; Sharyn N Lewin; William M Burke; Xuming Sun; Thomas J Herzog; Jason D Wright
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  Survey study of anesthesiologists' and surgeons' ordering of unnecessary preoperative laboratory tests.

Authors:  Robert I Katz; Franklin Dexter; Kenneth Rosenfeld; Laura Wolfe; Valerie Redmond; Deepti Agarwal; Irim Salik; Karen Goldsteen; Melody Goodman; Peter S A Glass
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 5.108

9.  The usefulness of preoperative laboratory screening.

Authors:  E B Kaplan; L B Sheiner; A J Boeckmann; M F Roizen; S L Beal; S N Cohen; C D Nicoll
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1985-06-28       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Preoperative laboratory testing in patients undergoing elective, low-risk ambulatory surgery.

Authors:  Jaime Benarroch-Gampel; Kristin M Sheffield; Casey B Duncan; Kimberly M Brown; Yimei Han; Courtney M Townsend; Taylor S Riall
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 12.969

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.