Dataset Information

Moving enhanced recovery after surgery from implementation to sustainability across a health system: a qualitative assessment of leadership perspectives.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Knowledge Translation evidence from health care practitioners and administrators implementing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) care has allowed for the spread and scale of the health care innovation. There is a need to identify at a health system level, what it takes from a leadership perspective to move from implementation to sustainability over time. The purpose of this research was to systematically synthesize feedback from health care leaders to inform further spread, scale and sustainability of ERAS care across a health system.

Methods

Alberta Health Services (AHS) is the largest Canadian health system with approximately 280,000 surgeries annually at more than 50 surgical sites. In 2013 to 2014, AHS used a structured approach to successfully implement ERAS colorectal guidelines at six sites. Between 2016 and 2018, three of the six sites expanded ERAS to other surgical areas (gynecologic oncology, hepatectomy, pancreatectomy/Whipple's, and cystectomy). This research was designed to explore and learn from the experiences of health care leaders involved in the AHS ERAS implementation expansion (eg. surgical care unit, hospital site or provincial program) and build on the model for knowledge mobilization develop during implementation. Following informed consent, leaders were interviewed using a structured interview guide. Data were recorded, coded and analyzed qualitatively through a combination of theory-driven immersion and crystallization, and template coding using NVivo 12.

Results

Forty-four individuals (13 physician leaders, 19 leading clinicians and hospital administrators, and 11 provincial leaders) were interviewed. Themes were identified related to Supportive Environments including resources, data, leadership; Champion and Nurse coordinator role; and Capacity Building through change management, education, and teams. The perception and role of leaders changed through initiation and implementation, spread, and sustainability. Barriers and enablers were thematically aligned relative to outcome assessment, consistency of implementation, ERAS care compliance, and the implementation of multiple guidelines.

Conclusions

Health care leaders have unique perspectives and approaches to support spread, scale and sustainability of ERAS that are different from site based ERAS teams. These findings inform us what leaders need to do or need to do differently to support implementation and to foster spread, scale and sustainability of ERAS.

SUBMITTER: Gramlich L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7183608 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Moving enhanced recovery after surgery from implementation to sustainability across a health system: a qualitative assessment of leadership perspectives.

Gramlich Leah L Nelson Gregg G Nelson Alison A Lagendyk Laura L Gilmour Loreen E LE Wasylak Tracy T

BMC health services research 20200426 1

<h4>Background</h4>Knowledge Translation evidence from health care practitioners and administrators implementing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) care has allowed for the spread and scale of the health care innovation. There is a need to identify at a health system level, what it takes from a leadership perspective to move from implementation to sustainability over time. The purpose of this research was to systematically synthesize feedback from health care leaders to inform further spread ...[more]

PMID: 32336268

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aims to elucidate determinants for succesful implementation of the Enhanced Recovery After Thoracic Surgery (ERATS) protocol for perioperative care for surgical lung cancer patients in the Netherlands.SettingLung cancer operations are performed in both academic and regional hospitals, either by cardiothoracic or general thoracic surgeons. Limiting the impact of these operations by optimising and standardising perioperative care with the ERATS protocol is thought to enable reduction in length of stay, complications and costs.ParticipantsA broad spectrum of stakeholders in perioperative care for patients with lung resection participated in this study, ranging from patient representatives, healthcare professionals to an insurance company representative.InterventionsSemistructured interviews (N=14) were conducted with the stakeholders (N=18). The interviews were conducted one on one by telephone and two times, face to face, in small groups. Verbatim transcriptions of these interviews were coded for the purpose of thematic analysis.Outcome measuresDeterminants for successful implementation of the ERATS protocol in the Netherlands.ResultsSeveral determinants correspond with previous publications: having a multidisciplinary team, leadership from a senior clinician and support from an ERAS-coordinator as facilitators; lack of feedback on performance and absence of management support as barriers. Our study underscores the potential detrimental effect of inconsistent communication, the lack of support in the transition from hospital to home and the barrier posed by lack of accessible audit data.ConclusionsBased on a structured problem analysis among a wide selection of stakeholders, this study provides a solid basis for choosing adequate implementation strategies to introduce the ERATS protocol in the Netherlands. Emphasis on consistent and sufficient communication, support in the transition from hospital to home and adequate audit and feedback data, in addition to established implementation strategies for ERAS-type programmes, will enable a tailored approach to implementation of ERATS in the Dutch context.

Project description:ObjectivesTo conduct a systematic review of qualitative studies which explore health professionals' experiences of and perspectives on the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway.DesignSystematic review of qualitative literature using a qualitative content analysis. Literature includes the experiences and views of a wide range of multidisciplinary team and allied health professional staff, to incorporate a diverse range of clinical and professional perspectives.Data sourcesPsycINFO, Medline, CINAHL and PubMed were searched in May 2017.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesThe searches included relevant qualitative studies across a range of healthcare contexts. We included studies published from 2000 to 2017, as an appropriate time frame to capture evidence about ERAS after implementation in the late 1990s. Only studies published in the English language were included, and we included studies that explicitly stated that they used qualitative approaches.Data extraction and synthesisLiterature searches were conducted by the first author and checked by the second author: both contributed to the extraction and analysis of data. Studies identified as relevant were assessed for eligibility using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme guidance.ResultsEight studies were included in the review, including studies in six countries and in four surgical specialties. Included studies focus on health professionals' experiences of ERAS before, during and after implementation in colorectal surgery, gastrointestinal surgery, abdominal hysterectomy and orthopaedics. Five main themes emerged in the analysis: communication and collaboration, resistance to change, role and significance of protocol-based care, and knowledge and expectations. Professionals described the importance of effective multidisciplinary team collaboration and communication, providing thorough education to staff and patients, and appointing a dedicated champion as means to implement and integrate ERAS pathways successfully. Evidence-based guidelines were thought to be useful for improvements to patient care by standardising practices and reducing treatment variations, but were thought to be too open to interpretation at local levels. Setting and managing 'realistic' expectations of staff was seen as a priority. Staff attitudes towards ERAS tend to become more favourable over time, as practices become successfully 'normalised'. Strengths of the review are that it includes a wide range of different studies, a variety of clinical populations, diversity of methodological approaches and local contexts. Its limitation is the inclusion of a small number of studies, although these represent six countries and four surgical specialties, and so our findings are likely to be transferable.ConclusionsStaff feel positive about the implementation of ERAS, but find the process is complex and challenging. Challenges can be addressed by ensuring that multidisciplinary teams understand ERAS principles and guidelines, and communicate well with one another and with patients. Provision of comprehensive, coherent and locally relevant information to health professionals is helpful. Identifying and recruiting local ERAS champions is likely to improve the implementation and delivery of ERAS pathways.Prospero registration numberCRD42017059952.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the evidence on the impact of enhanced recovery programmes for patients undergoing elective surgery in acute hospital settings in the UK.DesignRapid evidence synthesis. Eight databases were searched from 1990 to March 2013 without language restrictions. Relevant reports and guidelines, websites and reference lists of retrieved articles were scanned to identify additional studies. Systematic reviews, RCTs not included in the systematic reviews, economic evaluations and UK NHS cost analysis, implementation case studies and surveys of patient experience in a UK setting were eligible for inclusion.Primary and secondary outcome measuresWe assessed the impact of enhanced recovery programmes on health or cost-related outcomes, and assessed implementation case studies and patient experience in UK settings. Studies were quality assessed where appropriate using the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects critical appraisal process.Results17 systematic reviews and 12 additional RCTs were included. Ten relevant economic evaluations were included. No cost analysis studies were identified. Most of the evidence focused on colorectal surgery. 14 innovation case studies and 15 implementation case studies undertaken in National Health Service settings described factors critical to the success of an enhanced recovery programme. Evidence for colorectal surgery suggests that enhanced recovery programmes may reduce hospital stays by 0.5-3.5?days compared with conventional care. There were no significant differences in reported readmission rates. Other surgical specialties showed greater variation in reductions in length of stay reflecting the limited evidence identified. Findings relating to other outcomes were hampered by a lack of robust evidence and poor reporting.ConclusionsThere is consistent, albeit limited, evidence that enhanced recovery programmes can reduce length of patient hospital stay without increasing readmission rates. The extent to which managers and clinicians considering implementing enhanced recovery programmes in UK settings can realise savings will depend on length of stay achieved under their existing care pathway.

Project description:ObjectivesExplore the experience of patients undergoing colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programme. Use these experiential data to inform the development of a framework to support ongoing, meaningful patient engagement in ERAS.DesignQualitative patient-led study using focus groups and narrative interviews. Data were analysed iteratively using a Participatory Grounded Theory approach.SettingFive tertiary care centres in Alberta, Canada, following the ERAS programme.ParticipantsTwenty-seven patients who had undergone colorectal surgery in the last 12 months were recruited through purposive sampling. Seven patients participated in a codesign focus group to set and prioritise the research direction. Narrative interviews were conducted with 20 patients.ResultsPatients perceived that an ERAS programme should not be limited to the perioperative period, but should encompass the journey from diagnosis to recovery. Practical recommendations to improve the patient experience across the surgical continuum, and enhance patient engagement within ERAS included: (1) fully explain every protocol, and the purpose of the protocol, both before surgery and while in-hospital, so that patients can become knowledgeable partners in their recovery; (2) extend ERAS guidelines to the presurgery phase, so that patients can be ready emotionally, psychologically and physically for surgery; (3) extend ERAS guidelines to the recovery period at home to avoid stressful situations for patients and families; (4) consider activating a programme where experienced patients can provide peer support; (5) one size does not fit all; personalised adaptations within the standardised pathway are required.Drawing upon these data, and through consultation with ERAS Alberta stakeholders, the ERAS team developed a matrix to guide sustained patient involvement and action throughout the surgical care continuum at three levels: individual, unit and ERAS system.ConclusionThis patient-led study generated new insights into the needs of ERAS patients and informed the development of a framework to improve patient experiences and outcomes.

Dataset Information

Moving enhanced recovery after surgery from implementation to sustainability across a health system: a qualitative assessment of leadership perspectives.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Moving enhanced recovery after surgery from implementation to sustainability across a health system: a qualitative assessment of leadership perspectives.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets