OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to compare the total opioid use by patients undergoing apical pelvic organ prolapse surgery before and after implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol (ERP). METHODS: Participants of this ambispective cohort study included a "pre-ERP" retrospective cohort and an "ERP" cohort of patients prospectively enrolled after the full implementation of the ERP in January 2019. Demographic and clinical data were collected from the electronic record. Descriptive statistics were used for demographic variables. Total opioid use was calculated for each participant using morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and compared between cohorts using the Student t test. RESULTS: Study participants (n = 65) were similar between cohorts and had a mean (SD) age of 62.4 (9.7) years and body mass index of 28.9 (4.8), and had a median parity of 3 (interquartile range, 2-4). Comorbid conditions, assessed with the Charlson Comorbidity Index, were also similar, with a mean (SD) of 2 (2.9). Hysterectomy approach and apical procedures did not differ between groups. After ERP implementation, mean (SD) intraoperative and postoperative MMEs decreased significantly (59.4 [31.6] vs 36.9 [20.5], P < 0.01). Total MMEs prescribed at discharge also decreased (392.3 [88.4] vs 94.6 [61.3], P < 0.01). Total anesthesia time and surgical time were similar, whereas mean total admission time decreased (27.3 [10.8] vs 18 [8.6] hours, P < 0.01). Telephone calls within 30 days increased from mean 1 (1.0) to 2.2 (1.9) (P < 0.01), whereas clinic visits and 30-day readmissions did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: Women undergoing apical pelvic organ prolapse surgery at an academic medical center received significantly fewer opioids after implementation of an ERP without a change in postoperative pain scores.
OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to compare the total opioid use by patients undergoing apical pelvic organ prolapse surgery before and after implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol (ERP). METHODS: Participants of this ambispective cohort study included a "pre-ERP" retrospective cohort and an "ERP" cohort of patients prospectively enrolled after the full implementation of the ERP in January 2019. Demographic and clinical data were collected from the electronic record. Descriptive statistics were used for demographic variables. Total opioid use was calculated for each participant using morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and compared between cohorts using the Student t test. RESULTS: Study participants (n = 65) were similar between cohorts and had a mean (SD) age of 62.4 (9.7) years and body mass index of 28.9 (4.8), and had a median parity of 3 (interquartile range, 2-4). Comorbid conditions, assessed with the Charlson Comorbidity Index, were also similar, with a mean (SD) of 2 (2.9). Hysterectomy approach and apical procedures did not differ between groups. After ERP implementation, mean (SD) intraoperative and postoperative MMEs decreased significantly (59.4 [31.6] vs 36.9 [20.5], P < 0.01). Total MMEs prescribed at discharge also decreased (392.3 [88.4] vs 94.6 [61.3], P < 0.01). Total anesthesia time and surgical time were similar, whereas mean total admission time decreased (27.3 [10.8] vs 18 [8.6] hours, P < 0.01). Telephone calls within 30 days increased from mean 1 (1.0) to 2.2 (1.9) (P < 0.01), whereas clinic visits and 30-day readmissions did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: Women undergoing apical pelvic organ prolapse surgery at an academic medical center received significantly fewer opioids after implementation of an ERP without a change in postoperative pain scores.
Authors: Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Matthias Egger; Stuart J Pocock; Peter C Gøtzsche; Jan P Vandenbroucke Journal: Lancet Date: 2007-10-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
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
Authors: R Tyler Hillman; Amalia Sanchez-Migallon; Larissa A Meyer; Maria D Iniesta; Katherine E Cain; Ashley M Siverand; Simone P L Veum; Tina S Suki; Javier D Lasala; Pedro T Ramirez Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2019-03-20 Impact factor: 5.482
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
Authors: Aparna S Ramaseshan; David M O'Sullivan; Adam C Steinberg; Elena Tunitsky-Bitton Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2020-05-13 Impact factor: 8.661