Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 4/2021

Open Access 01-04-2021 | Original Scientific Report

Swiss Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Database

Authors: Basile Pache, David Martin, Valérie Addor, Nicolas Demartines, Martin Hübner

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 4/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have considerably improved postoperative outcomes and are in use for various types of surgery. The prospective audit system (EIAS) could be a powerful tool for large-scale outcome research but its database has not been validated yet.

Methods

Swiss ERAS centers were invited to contribute to the validation of the Swiss chapter for colorectal surgery. A monitoring team performed on-site visits by the use of a standardized checklist. Validation criteria were (I) coverage (No. of operated patients within ERAS protocol; target threshold for validation: ≥ 80%), (II) missing data (8 predefined variables; target ≤ 10%), and (III) accuracy (2 predefined variables, target ≥ 80%). These criteria were assessed by comparing EIAS entries with the medical charts of a random sample of patients per center (range 15–20).

Results

Out of 18 Swiss ERAS centers, 15 agreed to have onsite monitoring but 13 granted access to the final dataset. ERAS coverage was available in only 7 centers and varied between 76 and 100%. Overall missing data rate was 5.7% and concerned mainly the variables “urinary catheter removal” (16.4%) and “mobilization on day 1” (16%). Accuracy for the length of hospital stay and complications was overall 84.6%. Overall, 5 over 13 centers failed in the validation process for one or several criteria.

Conclusion

EIAS was validated in most Swiss ERAS centers. Potential patient selection and missing data remain sources of bias in non-validated centers. Therefore, simplified validation of other centers appears to be mandatory before large-scale use of the EIAS dataset.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ljungqvist O, Scott M, Fearon KC (2017) Enhanced recovery after surgery: a review. JAMA Surg 152:292–298CrossRef Ljungqvist O, Scott M, Fearon KC (2017) Enhanced recovery after surgery: a review. JAMA Surg 152:292–298CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Martin D, Roulin D, Addor V et al (2016) Enhanced recovery implementation in colorectal surgery-temporary or persistent improvement? Langenbecks Arch Surg 401:1163–1169CrossRef Martin D, Roulin D, Addor V et al (2016) Enhanced recovery implementation in colorectal surgery-temporary or persistent improvement? Langenbecks Arch Surg 401:1163–1169CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Gustafsson UO, Hausel J, Thorell A et al (2011) Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Archiv Surg 146:571–577CrossRef Gustafsson UO, Hausel J, Thorell A et al (2011) Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Archiv Surg 146:571–577CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRef Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Alluri RK, Leland H, Heckmann N (2016) Surgical research using national databases. Ann Trans Med 4:393CrossRef Alluri RK, Leland H, Heckmann N (2016) Surgical research using national databases. Ann Trans Med 4:393CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Adkinson JM, Casale MT, Kim JY et al (2016) So you have a research idea: a survey of databases available for plastic surgery research. Plast Reconstr Surg 137:680–689CrossRef Adkinson JM, Casale MT, Kim JY et al (2016) So you have a research idea: a survey of databases available for plastic surgery research. Plast Reconstr Surg 137:680–689CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Mitchell TO, Holihan JL, Askenasy EP et al (2016) Do risk calculators accurately predict surgical site occurrences? J Surg Res 203:56–63CrossRef Mitchell TO, Holihan JL, Askenasy EP et al (2016) Do risk calculators accurately predict surgical site occurrences? J Surg Res 203:56–63CrossRef
8.
go back to reference McMillan MT, Allegrini V, Asbun HJ et al (2017) Incorporation of procedure-specific risk into the ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator improves the prediction of morbidity and mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 265:978–986CrossRef McMillan MT, Allegrini V, Asbun HJ et al (2017) Incorporation of procedure-specific risk into the ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator improves the prediction of morbidity and mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 265:978–986CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Madigan D, Ryan PB, Schuemie M et al (2013) Evaluating the impact of database heterogeneity on observational study results. Am J Epidemiol 178:645–651CrossRef Madigan D, Ryan PB, Schuemie M et al (2013) Evaluating the impact of database heterogeneity on observational study results. Am J Epidemiol 178:645–651CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Campos-Varela I, Villaverde-Castañeda R, Ruano-Raviña A (2019) Retraction of publications: a study of biomedical journals retracting publications based on impact factor and journal category. Gaceta Sanitaria 34(5):430–434CrossRef Campos-Varela I, Villaverde-Castañeda R, Ruano-Raviña A (2019) Retraction of publications: a study of biomedical journals retracting publications based on impact factor and journal category. Gaceta Sanitaria 34(5):430–434CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Guldberg R, Brostrøm S, Hansen JK et al (2013) The danish urogynaecological database: establishment, completeness and validity. Int Urogynecol J 24:983–990CrossRef Guldberg R, Brostrøm S, Hansen JK et al (2013) The danish urogynaecological database: establishment, completeness and validity. Int Urogynecol J 24:983–990CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Chen H, Hailey D, Wang N et al (2014) A review of data quality assessment methods for public health information systems. Int J Environ Res Public Health 11:5170–5207CrossRef Chen H, Hailey D, Wang N et al (2014) A review of data quality assessment methods for public health information systems. Int J Environ Res Public Health 11:5170–5207CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Chen H, Yu P, Hailey D et al (2014) Methods for assessing the quality of data in public health information systems: a critical review. Studies Health Technol Inform 204:13–18 Chen H, Yu P, Hailey D et al (2014) Methods for assessing the quality of data in public health information systems: a critical review. Studies Health Technol Inform 204:13–18
14.
go back to reference Martin D, Roulin D, Grass F et al (2018) A multicentre qualitative study assessing implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery program. Clin Nutr 37:2172–2177CrossRef Martin D, Roulin D, Grass F et al (2018) A multicentre qualitative study assessing implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery program. Clin Nutr 37:2172–2177CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Bradley EH, Holmboe ES, Mattera JA et al (2004) Data feedback efforts in quality improvement: lessons learned from US hospitals. Qual Saf Health Care 13:26–31CrossRef Bradley EH, Holmboe ES, Mattera JA et al (2004) Data feedback efforts in quality improvement: lessons learned from US hospitals. Qual Saf Health Care 13:26–31CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Francis NK, Walker T, Carter F et al (2018) Consensus on training and implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery: a delphi study. World J Surg 42:1919–1928CrossRef Francis NK, Walker T, Carter F et al (2018) Consensus on training and implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery: a delphi study. World J Surg 42:1919–1928CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Pache B, Addor V, Hübner M (2020) Nursing considerations during patient recovery. Enhanced recovery after surgery. Springer, Cham, pp 229–234CrossRef Pache B, Addor V, Hübner M (2020) Nursing considerations during patient recovery. Enhanced recovery after surgery. Springer, Cham, pp 229–234CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Swiss Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Database
Authors
Basile Pache
David Martin
Valérie Addor
Nicolas Demartines
Martin Hübner
Publication date
01-04-2021
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 4/2021
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05926-z

Other articles of this Issue 4/2021

World Journal of Surgery 4/2021 Go to the issue