BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) are a multimodal approach to standardize perioperative care. To substantiate the benefit of a pediatric-centered pathway, we compared outcomes of children treated with pediatric ERP (pERP) versus adult (aERP) pathways. We aimed to compare components of each pathway to create a new comprehensive pERP to reduce variation in care. METHODS: Retrospective study of children (≤18 y) undergoing elective colorectal surgery from August 2015 to April 2019 at a single institution managed with pERP versus aERP. Multivariable linear and logistic regression, adjusting for demographics and operation characteristics, were used to compare outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 100 hospitalizations (72 patients) were identified, including 37 treated with pERP. pERP patients were, on average, younger (13 versus 16 y), more likely to be ASA III (70% versus 30%), and more likely to receive regional (32% versus 3%) or neuraxial (35% versus 8%) anesthesia. Epidural use was an independent risk factor for longer length of stay (P = 0.000). After adjustment, pERP patients had similar LOS and time to oral intake, but shorter foley duration. pERP patients used significantly fewer opioids and were less likely to return to the operating room within 30 d. 30-d readmissions and ED visits were also lower, but this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: At our institution, data from both ERPs contributed formation of a synthesized pathway and reflected the pERP approach to opioid utilization and the aERP approach to earlier enteral nutrition.
BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) are a multimodal approach to standardize perioperative care. To substantiate the benefit of a pediatric-centered pathway, we compared outcomes of children treated with pediatric ERP (pERP) versus adult (aERP) pathways. We aimed to compare components of each pathway to create a new comprehensive pERP to reduce variation in care. METHODS: Retrospective study of children (≤18 y) undergoing elective colorectal surgery from August 2015 to April 2019 at a single institution managed with pERP versus aERP. Multivariable linear and logistic regression, adjusting for demographics and operation characteristics, were used to compare outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 100 hospitalizations (72 patients) were identified, including 37 treated with pERP. pERP patients were, on average, younger (13 versus 16 y), more likely to be ASA III (70% versus 30%), and more likely to receive regional (32% versus 3%) or neuraxial (35% versus 8%) anesthesia. Epidural use was an independent risk factor for longer length of stay (P = 0.000). After adjustment, pERP patients had similar LOS and time to oral intake, but shorter foley duration. pERP patients used significantly fewer opioids and were less likely to return to the operating room within 30 d. 30-d readmissions and ED visits were also lower, but this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: At our institution, data from both ERPs contributed formation of a synthesized pathway and reflected the pERP approach to opioid utilization and the aERP approach to earlier enteral nutrition.
Authors: Marina L Reppucci; Lea A Wehrli; Julie Schletker; Margo M Nolan; Jared Rieck; Souha Fares; Jill Ketzer; Kyle Rove; Alberto Pena; Luis de la Torre; Andrea Bischoff Journal: Pediatr Surg Int Date: 2022-09-13 Impact factor: 2.003