Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 2/2015

01-02-2015 | Original Scientific Report

Sustainability of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program (ERAS) in Colonic Surgery

Authors: F. Gillissen, S. M. C. Ament, J. M. C. Maessen, C. H. C. Dejong, C. D. Dirksen, T. van der Weijden, M. F. von Meyenfeldt

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 2/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Between 2006 and 2008 the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program was implemented in colonic surgery in one-third of all hospitals in the Netherlands (n = 33). This resulted in enhanced recovery and a decrease in hospital length of stay (LOS) from a median of 9 days at baseline to 6 days at one-year follow-up. The present study assessed the sustainability of the ERAS program 3–5 years after its implementation.

Materials and methods

From the 33 ERAS hospitals, 10 initially successful hospitals were selected, with success defined as a median LOS of 6 days or lower and protocol adherence rates above 70 %. In 2012 a retrospective audit of 30 consecutive patients was performed in each of these hospitals. Sustainability of the ERAS program was assessed on hospital level, using median hospital LOS, protocol adherence rates and time to functional recovery. Data were compared with the implementation phase data.

Results

Overall median LOS in the selected hospitals increased from 5.25 days (interquartile range [IQR] 4.75–6.00; min, 4.00—max, 6.00) to 6 days (IQR 5.00–7.00; min, 5.00—max, 8.00), but this change was not significant (p = 0.052). Time to functional recovery was equal in both phases: median 3.00 days (p = 0.26). Protocol adherence decreased from 75 to 67 % (p = 0.32). Especially adherence to postoperative care elements dropped considerably.

Conclusions

Despite a slight decrease in protocol adherence, the ERAS program was sustained reasonably well in the 10 selected hospitals, although there was quite some variation between the hospitals.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Grol R, Wensing M (2004) What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. Med J Aust 180(6 Suppl):S57–S60PubMed Grol R, Wensing M (2004) What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. Med J Aust 180(6 Suppl):S57–S60PubMed
2.
go back to reference Wilson KD, Kurz RS (2008) Bridging implementation and institutionalization within organizations: proposed employment of continuous quality improvement to further dissemination. J Public Health Manag Pract 14:109–116PubMedCrossRef Wilson KD, Kurz RS (2008) Bridging implementation and institutionalization within organizations: proposed employment of continuous quality improvement to further dissemination. J Public Health Manag Pract 14:109–116PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Grol R, Grimshaw J (2003) From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet 362(9391):1225–1230PubMedCrossRef Grol R, Grimshaw J (2003) From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet 362(9391):1225–1230PubMedCrossRef
4.
5.
go back to reference Scott-Findlay S, Golden-Biddle K (2005) Understanding how organizational culture shapes research use. J Nurs Adm 35:359–365PubMedCrossRef Scott-Findlay S, Golden-Biddle K (2005) Understanding how organizational culture shapes research use. J Nurs Adm 35:359–365PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Rangachari P, Rissing P, Rethemeyer K (2013) Awareness of evidence-based practices alone does not translate to implementation: insights from implementation research. Qual Manag Health Care 22:117–125PubMedCrossRef Rangachari P, Rissing P, Rethemeyer K (2013) Awareness of evidence-based practices alone does not translate to implementation: insights from implementation research. Qual Manag Health Care 22:117–125PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Scheirer MA (2005) Is sustainability possible? A review and commentary on empirical studies of program sustainability. Am J Eval 26:27CrossRef Scheirer MA (2005) Is sustainability possible? A review and commentary on empirical studies of program sustainability. Am J Eval 26:27CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Shediac-Rizkallah MC, Bone LR (1998) Planning for the sustainability of community-based health programs: conceptual frameworks and future directions for research, practice and policy. Health Educ Res 13:87–108PubMedCrossRef Shediac-Rizkallah MC, Bone LR (1998) Planning for the sustainability of community-based health programs: conceptual frameworks and future directions for research, practice and policy. Health Educ Res 13:87–108PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Gruen RL, Elliot JH, Nolan ML et al (2008) Sustainability science: an integrated approach for health-programme planning. Lancet 372(9649):1579–1589PubMedCrossRef Gruen RL, Elliot JH, Nolan ML et al (2008) Sustainability science: an integrated approach for health-programme planning. Lancet 372(9649):1579–1589PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Rabin BA, Brownson RC, Haire-Joshu D et al (2008) A glossary for dissemination and implementation research in health. J Public Health Manag Pract 14:117–123PubMedCrossRef Rabin BA, Brownson RC, Haire-Joshu D et al (2008) A glossary for dissemination and implementation research in health. J Public Health Manag Pract 14:117–123PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Ament SM, Gillissen F, Maessen JMC et al (2012) Sustainability of healthcare innovations (SUSHI): long term effects of two implemented surgical care programmes (protocol). BMC Health Serv Res 12:423PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Ament SM, Gillissen F, Maessen JMC et al (2012) Sustainability of healthcare innovations (SUSHI): long term effects of two implemented surgical care programmes (protocol). BMC Health Serv Res 12:423PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Tomson CR, van der Veer SN (2013) Learning from practice variation to improve the quality of care. Clin Med 13:19–23PubMedCrossRef Tomson CR, van der Veer SN (2013) Learning from practice variation to improve the quality of care. Clin Med 13:19–23PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Rogers WA, Lotz M, Hutchison K et al (2014) Identifying surgical innovation: a qualitative study of surgeons’ views. Ann Surg 259:273–278PubMedCrossRef Rogers WA, Lotz M, Hutchison K et al (2014) Identifying surgical innovation: a qualitative study of surgeons’ views. Ann Surg 259:273–278PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Cahill RA, Lindsey I (2011) Operative innovations for colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 13(Suppl 7):1–2PubMedCrossRef Cahill RA, Lindsey I (2011) Operative innovations for colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 13(Suppl 7):1–2PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Mathis KL, Boostrom SY, Pemberton JH (2013) New developments in colorectal surgery. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 29:72–78PubMedCrossRef Mathis KL, Boostrom SY, Pemberton JH (2013) New developments in colorectal surgery. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 29:72–78PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Atallah S, Nassif G, Polavarapu H et al (2013) Robotic-assisted transanal surgery for total mesorectal excision (RATS-TME): a description of a novel surgical approach with video demonstration. Tech Coloproctol 17:441–447PubMedCrossRef Atallah S, Nassif G, Polavarapu H et al (2013) Robotic-assisted transanal surgery for total mesorectal excision (RATS-TME): a description of a novel surgical approach with video demonstration. Tech Coloproctol 17:441–447PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Von Meyenfeldt M et al (2005) Enhanced recovery after surgery: a consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection. Clin Nutr 24:466–477PubMedCrossRef Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Von Meyenfeldt M et al (2005) Enhanced recovery after surgery: a consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection. Clin Nutr 24:466–477PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Kehlet H (1997) Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth 78:606–617PubMedCrossRef Kehlet H (1997) Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth 78:606–617PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Kehlet H, Mogensen T (1999) Hospital stay of 2 days after open sigmoidectomy with a multimodal rehabilitation programme. Br J Surg 86:227–230PubMedCrossRef Kehlet H, Mogensen T (1999) Hospital stay of 2 days after open sigmoidectomy with a multimodal rehabilitation programme. Br J Surg 86:227–230PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Dejong CH et al (2010) The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing major elective open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr 29:434–440PubMedCrossRef Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Dejong CH et al (2010) The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing major elective open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr 29:434–440PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Vlug MS, Wind J, Hollmann MW et al (2011) Laparoscopy in combination with fast track multimodal management is the best perioperative strategy in patients undergoing colonic surgery: a randomized clinical trial (LAFA-study). Ann Surg 254:868–875PubMedCrossRef Vlug MS, Wind J, Hollmann MW et al (2011) Laparoscopy in combination with fast track multimodal management is the best perioperative strategy in patients undergoing colonic surgery: a randomized clinical trial (LAFA-study). Ann Surg 254:868–875PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Gillissen F, Hoff C, Maessen JM et al (2013) Structured synchronous implementation of an enhanced recovery program in elective colonic surgery in 33 hospitals in the Netherlands. World J Surg 37:1082–1093. doi:10.1007/s00268-013-1938-4 PubMedCrossRef Gillissen F, Hoff C, Maessen JM et al (2013) Structured synchronous implementation of an enhanced recovery program in elective colonic surgery in 33 hospitals in the Netherlands. World J Surg 37:1082–1093. doi:10.​1007/​s00268-013-1938-4 PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Hendry PO, Hausel J, Nygren J et al (2009) Determinants of outcome after colorectal resection within an enhanced recovery programme. Br J Surg 96:197–205PubMedCrossRef Hendry PO, Hausel J, Nygren J et al (2009) Determinants of outcome after colorectal resection within an enhanced recovery programme. Br J Surg 96:197–205PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Biffl WL, Spain DA, Reitsma AM et al (2008) Responsible development and application of surgical innovations: a position statement of the Society of University Surgeons. J Am Coll Surg 206:1204–1209PubMedCrossRef Biffl WL, Spain DA, Reitsma AM et al (2008) Responsible development and application of surgical innovations: a position statement of the Society of University Surgeons. J Am Coll Surg 206:1204–1209PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Ahmed J, Kahn S, Lim M et al (2012) Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols—compliance and variations in practice during routine colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis 14:1045–1051PubMedCrossRef Ahmed J, Kahn S, Lim M et al (2012) Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols—compliance and variations in practice during routine colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis 14:1045–1051PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Walker AE et al (2002) Changing physicians’ behavior: what works and thoughts on getting more things to work. J Contin Educ Health Prof 22:237–243PubMedCrossRef Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Walker AE et al (2002) Changing physicians’ behavior: what works and thoughts on getting more things to work. J Contin Educ Health Prof 22:237–243PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Polle SW, Wind J, Fuhring JW et al (2007) Implementation of a fast-track perioperative care program: what are the difficulties? Dig Surg 24:441–449PubMedCrossRef Polle SW, Wind J, Fuhring JW et al (2007) Implementation of a fast-track perioperative care program: what are the difficulties? Dig Surg 24:441–449PubMedCrossRef
31.
32.
go back to reference Wiltsey Stirman S, Kimberly J, Cook N et al (2012) The sustainability of new programs and innovations: a review of the empirical literature and recommendations for future research. Implement Sci 7:17PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Wiltsey Stirman S, Kimberly J, Cook N et al (2012) The sustainability of new programs and innovations: a review of the empirical literature and recommendations for future research. Implement Sci 7:17PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Sustainability of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program (ERAS) in Colonic Surgery
Authors
F. Gillissen
S. M. C. Ament
J. M. C. Maessen
C. H. C. Dejong
C. D. Dirksen
T. van der Weijden
M. F. von Meyenfeldt
Publication date
01-02-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 2/2015
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2744-3

Other articles of this Issue 2/2015

World Journal of Surgery 2/2015 Go to the issue