Project description:BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs are associated with reduced hospital morbidity and mortality. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether the introduction of ERAS care improved the adverse events in colorectal surgery. In a cohort study, mortality, morbidity, and length of stay were compared between ERAS patients and carefully matched historical controls. METHODS: Patients were matched for their type of disease, the type of surgery, P-Possum (Portsmouth-Possum), CR-Possum (Colorectal-Possum) Physiological and Operative Score for Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity (POSSUM), gender, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade. The primary outcome measures of this study were mortality and morbidity. Secondary outcome measures were fluid intake, length of hospital stay, the number of relaparotomies, and the number of readmissions within 30 days. Data on the ERAS patients were collected prospectively. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients treated according to the ERAS program were compared with 122 patients who received conventional postoperative care. The two groups were comparable with respect to age, ASA grade, P-Possum (Portsmouth-Possum), CR-Possum (Colorectal-Possum) score, type of surgery, stoma formation, type of disease, and gender. Morbidity was lower in the ERAS group compared to the control group (14.8% versus 33.6% respectively; P = <0.01). Patients in the ERAS group received significantly less fluid and spent fewer days in the hospital (median 6 days, range 3-50 vs. median 9 days, range 3-138; P = 0.032). There was no difference between the ERAS and the control group for mortality (0% vs. 1.6%; P = 0.55) and readmission rate (3.3% vs. 1.6%; P = 0.60). CONCLUSION: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program reduces morbidity and the length of hospital stay for patients undergoing elective colonic or rectal surgery.
Project description:BackgroundWhilst Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) has been widely accepted in the international colorectal surgery community, there remains significant variations in ERAS programme implementations, compliance rates and best practice recommendations in international guidelines.MethodsA questionnaire was distributed to colorectal surgeons from Australia and New Zealand after ethics approval. It evaluated specialist attitudes towards the effectiveness of specific ERAS interventions in improving short term outcomes after colorectal surgery. The data were analysed using a rating scale and graded response model in item response theory (IRT) on Stata MP, version 15 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX).ResultsOf 300 colorectal surgeons, 95 (31.7%) participated in the survey. Of eighteen ERAS interventions, this study identified eight strategies as most effective in improving ERAS programmes alongside early oral feeding and mobilisation. These included pre-operative iron infusion for anaemic patients (IRT score = 7.82 [95% CI: 6.01-9.16]), minimally invasive surgery (IRT score = 7.77 [95% CI: 5.96-9.07]), early in-dwelling catheter removal (IRT score = 7.69 [95% CI: 5.83-9.01]), pre-operative smoking cessation (IRT score = 7.68 [95% CI: 5.49-9.18]), pre-operative counselling (IRT score = 7.44 [95% CI: 5.58-8.88]), avoiding drains in colon surgery (IRT score = 7.37 [95% CI: 5.17-8.95]), avoiding nasogastric tubes (IRT score = 7.29 [95% CI: 5.32-8.8]) and early drain removal in rectal surgery (IRT score = 5.64 [95% CI: 3.49-7.66]).ConclusionsThis survey has demonstrated the current attitudes of colorectal surgeons from Australia and New Zealand regarding ERAS interventions. Eight of the interventions assessed in this study including pre-operative iron infusion for anaemic patients, minimally invasive surgery, early in-dwelling catheter removal, pre-operative smoking cessation, pre-operative counselling, avoidance of drains in colon surgery, avoiding nasogastric tubes and early drain removal in rectal surgery should be considered an important part of colorectal ERAS programmes.
Project description:BackgroundTo focus on critical care needs of coronavirus patients, elective operations were postponed and selectively rescheduled. The effect of these measures on patients was unknown. We sought to understand patients' perspectives regarding surgical care during the CoVID-19 pandemic to improve future responses.MethodsWe performed qualitative interviews with patients whose operations were postponed. Interviews explored patient responses to: 1) surgery postponement; 2) experience of surgery; 3) impacts of rescheduling/postponement on emotional/physical health; 4) identifying areas of improvement. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed through an integrated approach.ResultsPatient perspectives fell within the following domains: 1) reactions to surgery postponement/rescheduling; 2) experience of surgery during CoVID-19 pandemic; 3) reflections on communication; 4) patient trust in surgeons and healthcare.ConclusionsWe found no patient-reported barriers to rescheduling surgery. Several areas of care which could be improved (communication). There was an unexpected sense of trust in surgeons and the hospital.
Project description:BackgroundSurgery remains the first curative treatment for colorectal cancer. Prehabilitation seems to attenuate the loss of lean mass in the early postoperative period. However, its long-term role has not been studied. Lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic has forced to carry out the prehabilitation program at home. This study aimed to assess the effect of home prehabilitation on body composition, complications, and hospital stay in patients undergoing oncological colorectal surgery.MethodsA prospective and randomized clinical study was conducted in 20 patients operated of colorectal cancer during COVID-19 lockdown (13 March to 21 June 2020) in a single university clinical hospital. Patients were randomized into two study groups (10 per group): prehabilitation vs standard care. Changes in lean mass and fat mass at 45 and 90 days after surgery were measured using multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis.ResultsPrehabilitation managed to reduce hospital stay (4.8 vs 7.2 days, p = 0.052) and postoperative complications (20% vs 50%, p = 0.16). Forty-five days after surgery, the loss of lean mass decreased (1.7% vs 7.1%, p = 0.17). These differences in lean mass were attenuated at 90 days; however, the standard care group increased considerably their fat mass compared to the prehabilitation group (+ 8.72% vs - 8.16%).ConclusionsHome prehabilitation has proven its effectiveness, achieving an attenuation of lean mass loss in the early postoperative period and a lower gain in fat mass in the late postoperative period. In addition, it has managed to reduce hospital stays and postoperative complications.Registration numberThis article is part of an ongoing, randomized, and controlled clinical trial approved by the ethics committee of our hospital and registered in ClinicalTrials.gov in August 2018 with registration number NCT03618329.
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 pandemic presented an unexpected challenge for the surgical community in general and Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) specialists in particular. This document aims to summarize recent evidence and experts' opinion and formulate recommendations to guide the surgical community on how to best organize the recovery plan for surgical activity across different sub-specialities after the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsRecommendations were developed through a Delphi process for establishment of expert consensus. Domain topics were formulated and subsequently subdivided into questions pertinent to different surgical specialities following the COVID-19 crisis. Sixty-five experts from 24 countries, representing the entire EAES board, were invited. Fifty clinicians and six engineers accepted the invitation and drafted statements based on specific key questions. Anonymous voting on the statements was performed until consensus was achieved, defined by at least 70% agreement.ResultsA total of 92 consensus statements were formulated with regard to safe resumption of surgery across eight domains, addressing general surgery, upper GI, lower GI, bariatrics, endocrine, HPB, abdominal wall and technology/research. The statements addressed elective and emergency services across all subspecialties with specific attention to the role of MIS during the recovery plan. Eighty-four of the statements were approved during the first round of Delphi voting (91.3%) and another 8 during the following round after substantial modification, resulting in a 100% consensus.ConclusionThe recommendations formulated by the EAES board establish a framework for resumption of surgery following COVID-19 pandemic with particular focus on the role of MIS across surgical specialities. The statements have the potential for wide application in the clinical setting, education activities and research work across different healthcare systems.
Project description:We believe a point-of-care (PoC) device for the rapid detection of the 2019 novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is crucial and urgently needed. With this perspective, we give suggestions regarding a potential candidate for the rapid detection of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), as well as factors for the preparedness and response to the outbreak of the COVID-19.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Perioperative care in colorectal surgery is systematically defined in the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol. The ERAS protocol improves perioperative care in a multimodal way to enhance early and safe release from the hospital. Adequate compliance to the elements of the ERAS protocol is multifactorial. There are still opportunities to improve compliance of the protocol by actively involving the patient. The main objective of this study is to investigate whether compliance of selected items in the ERAS protocol can be improved through actively involving patients in the ERAS care pathway through the use of a patient-centred mobile application. METHODS:A multicentre randomized controlled trial will be conducted. Patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery, who are 18?years or older and in possession of an eligible smartphone, will be included. Patients assigned to the intervention group will install a patient-centred mobile application to be guided through the ERAS care pathway. Patients in the control group will receive care as usual. Both groups will wear an activity tracker. The primary outcome is overall compliance to selected active elements of the ERAS protocol, as registered by the patient. Secondary outcomes include Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) such as health-related quality of life, physical activity, and patient satisfaction of received care. Care-related outcomes, such as length of hospital stay, number of complications, re-intervention, and readmission rates, will also be assessed. RESULTS:The enrolment of patients will start in the second quarter of 2019. Data collection had not begun by the time this protocol was submitted. CONCLUSION:We hypothesize that by providing patients with a patient-centred mobile application, compliance to the active elements of ERAS protocol can be improved, resulting in an increased health-related quality of life, physical activity, and patient satisfaction. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Netherlands Trial Register, NTR7314 , prospectively registered on the 9th of November 2017 ( http://www.trialregister.nl ).
Project description:This review evaluates the current and future role of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in the context of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs.There is substantial literature confirming the relationship between physical fitness and perioperative outcome in general. The few small studies in patients undergoing surgery within an ERAS program describe less fit individuals having a greater incidence of morbidity and mortality. There is evidence of increasing adoption of perioperative CPET, particularly in the UK. Although CPET-derived variables have been used to guide clinical decisions about choice of surgical procedure and level of perioperative care as well as to screen for uncommon comorbidities, the ability of CPET-derived variables to guide therapy and thereby improve outcome remains uncertain. Recent studies have reported a reduction in CPET-defined physical fitness following neoadjuvant therapies (chemo- and radio-therapy) prior to surgery. Preliminary data suggest that this effect may be associated with an adverse effect on clinical outcomes in less fit patients. Early reports suggest that CPET-derived variables can be used to guide the prescription of exercise training interventions and thereby improve physical fitness in patients prior to surgery (i.e., prehabilitation). The impact of such interventions on clinical outcomes remains uncertain.Perioperative CPET is finding an increasing spectrum of roles, including risk evaluation, collaborative decision-making, personalized care, monitoring interventions, and guiding prescription of prehabilitation. These indications are potentially of importance to patients having surgery within an ERAS program, but there are currently few publications specific to CPET in the context of ERAS programs.
Project description:BackgroundThe economic effects of the COVID-19 crisis are not like anything the U.S. health care system has ever experienced.MethodsAs we begin to emerge from the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, we need to plan the sustainable resumption of elective procedures. We must first ensure the safety of our patients and surgical staff. It must be a priority to monitor the availability of supplies for the continued care of patients suffering from COVID-19. As we resume elective orthopedic surgery and total joint arthroplasty, we must begin to reduce expenses by renegotiating vendor contracts, use ambulatory surgery centers and hospital outpatient departments in a safe and effective manner, adhere to strict evidence-based and COVID-19-adjusted practices, and incorporate telemedicine and other technology platforms when feasible for health care systems and orthopedic groups to survive economically.ResultsThe return to normalcy will be slow and may be different than what we are accustomed to, but we must work together to plan a transition to a more sustainable health care reality which accommodates a COVID-19 world.ConclusionOur goal should be using these lessons to achieve a healthy and successful 2021 fiscal year.
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic and its related human activity shutdowns provide unique opportunities for biodiversity monitoring through what has been termed the "anthropause" or the "great human confinement experiment." The pandemic caused immense disruption to human activity in the northeastern United States in the spring of 2020, with notable reductions in traffic levels. These shutdowns coincided with the seasonal migration of adult amphibians, which are typically subject to intense vehicle-impact mortality. Using data collected as part of an annual community science monitoring program in Maine from 2018 to 2021, we examined how amphibian mortality probabilities responded to reductions in traffic during the pandemic. While we detected a 50% decline for all amphibians, this was driven entirely by reductions in frog mortality. Wildlife collision data from the Maine Department of Transportation on other wildlife species support our finding of drastic declines in wildlife road mortality in spring 2020 when compared with immediately previous and subsequent years. Additionally, we find that frogs suffer significantly higher road mortality than salamanders, particularly when conditions are warmer and wetter.