Enhanced recovery in obstetrics

An enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for cesarean delivery decreases hospital stay and cost

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery pathways provide a multidisciplinary, evidence-based approach to the care of surgical patients. They have been shown to decrease postoperative length of stay and cost in several surgical subspecialties, including gynecology, but have not been well-studied in obstetric patients who undergo cesarean delivery.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine whether the implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for cesarean delivery would decrease postoperative length of stay and postoperative direct cost compared with historic controls.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study that compared postoperative length of stay and postoperative direct cost among women on the enhanced recovery after surgery cesarean delivery pathway in the first year of implementation (April 1, 2017, to March 31, 2018; n=531) compared with historic controls (March 1, 2016, to February 28, 2017; n=661). Literature review informed the development of a prototype enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for cesarean delivery based on best practices from previous enhanced recovery after surgery experience in obstetrics (if available) or from other surgical disciplines if there were no available data for obstetrics. When there was not relevant published evidence from obstetrics, the taskforce used clinical experience and expert opinion to develop the pathway. The enhanced recovery after surgery cesarean delivery pathway included preadmission patient education and preoperative, intrapartum, and postoperative elements. Some components reflected standard obstetric care, and others were specific to the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway. Women with pregestational diabetes mellitus who were receiving insulin therapy before pregnancy, women with preeclampsia with severe features, women with complex pain needs, and women with surgical complications were excluded from baseline and implementation groups. Enhanced recovery after surgery cesarean delivery pathway participation was determined by order set usage. Analysis was stratified for women who underwent planned (no labor; n=530) and unplanned (labor; n=662) cesarean delivery. Demographic and clinical characteristics, postoperative length of stay, postoperative direct cost, and readmission rates for the baseline and implementation groups were compared with the use of chi-square and t-tests.

RESULTS

During the first year of implementation, 531 of 640 eligible women (83%) were included in the enhanced recovery after surgery cesarean delivery pathway. Body mass index was marginally higher in the baseline group for unplanned cesarean delivery (32.5±7.1 vs 31.4±6.7 kg/m²; P=.04). Otherwise there were no significant differences in demographic or maternal clinical characteristics between baseline or implementation groups overall or for planned or unplanned cesarean delivery. Compared with baseline, implementation of the enhanced recovery after surgery cesarean delivery pathway resulted in a significant decrease in postoperative length of stay by 7.8% or 4.86 hours overall (P<.001) and for both planned (P=.001) and unplanned (P=.002) cesarean delivery. Total postoperative direct costs decreased by 8.4% or $642.85 per patient overall (P<.001) and for both planned (P<.001) and unplanned (P<.001) cesarean delivery. There were no significant differences in readmission rates.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for women who had planned or unplanned cesarean delivery was associated with significantly decreased postoperative length of stay and significant direct cost-savings per patient, without an increase in hospital readmissions. Given that cesarean delivery is 1 of the most common surgical procedures performed in the United States, positively impacting postoperative length of stay and direct cost for women who undergo cesarean delivery could have significant healthcare cost-savings.

A Survey of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols for Cesarean Delivery in Serbia

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been described for patients undergoing colon surgery. Similar protocols for cesarean delivery (CD) have been developed recently. CD is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures, and adoption of ERAS protocols following CD might benefit patients and the health-care system. We aimed to determine which Serbian hospitals reported ERAS protocols, which elements of ERAS protocols were used in CD patients, and whether ERAS and non-ERAS hospitals differed. The survey was sent to all hospitals with obstetric services and 46 of 49 responded. The questionnaire asked whether ERAS protocols had been formally adopted for surgical patients and about their use in CD patients. Specific questions on elements described in other obstetric ERAS protocols for CD included preoperative patient preparation, type of anesthesia and temperature monitoring used for CD, maternal/neonatal contact, and time to discharge. ERAS protocols are used in 24% of surveyed hospitals, 84% admit the patient the day before elective CDs, 87% use a maternal bowel preparation morning on the day of CD, and 80% administer maternal deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis. Only 33% remove IV in the first postoperative day, and 89% of women do not eat solid food until the day following their CD. Neuraxial anesthesia is used in 46% of elective CDs in ERAS hospitals compared to 9% in non-ERAS hospitals (P < 0.01), and neuraxial narcotics for post CD analgesia are given more often in ERAS hospitals. Thirty-six percentage of ERAS patients are discharged within 3 days vs. none in the non-ERAS group. Few elements of ERAS protocols reported from other centers outside Serbia are employed in Serbian hospitals performing CD. Despite significant changes that have been made recently in CD care, enhanced recovery after CD could be significantly improved in Serbian hospitals.

Implementing enhanced recovery pathways: a literature review with realist synthesis

OBJECTIVES

Enhanced Recovery Pathways (ERPs) are an increasingly popular, evidenced-based approach to surgery, designed to improve patient outcomes and reduce costs. Despite evidence demonstrating the benefits of these pathways, implementation and adherence have been inconsistent.

METHODS

Using realist synthesis, this review explored the current literature surrounding the implementation of ERPs in the UK. Knowledge consolidation between authors and consulting with field experts helped to guide the search strategy. Relevant medical and social science databases were searched from 2000 to 2016, as well as a general web search. A total of 17 papers were identified, including original research, reviews, case studies and guideline documents. Full texts were analysed, cross-examined, and data extracted and synthesised.

RESULTS

Several implementation strategies were identified, including the contexts in which these operated, the subsequent mechanisms of action that were triggered, and the outcome patterns they produced. Context-Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) configurations were generated, tested, and refined. These were grouped to develop two programme theories concerning ERP implementation, one related to the strategy of consulting with staff, the other with appointing a change agent to coordinate and drive the implementation process. These theories highlight instances in which implementation could be improved.

CONCLUSION

Current literature in ERP research is primarily focussed on measuring patient outcomes and cost effectiveness, and as a result, important detail regarding the implementation process is often not reported or described robustly. This review not only provides recommendations for future improvements in ERP implementation, but also highlights specific areas of focus for furthering ERP implementation research.