ABSTRACT
Background: The scale of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has necessitated healthcare systems to adapt and evolve, altering physician roles and expectations. Thoracic surgeons have seen practice changes from new COVID-19 consults to necessary delay and triage of elective care. The goal of this study was to understand the impact of COVID-19 on thoracic surgeon experiences in order to anticipate roles and changes in practice in future such circumstances. Methods: Semi-structured, qualitative individual telephone interviews were conducted with thoracic surgeons. Interviews were structured to understand how surgeons were impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and to record lessons learned. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was achieved. Data were analyzed using matrix analysis. Results: Eleven board-certified general thoracic surgeons from nine institutions were interviewed. Thoracic surgeon roles in COVID-19 care included critical care delivery, performing tracheostomies and establishing related protocols, and interventions for long-term airway complications. Attention was called to the impact of the pandemic on thoracic cancer: patients avoided hospitals because of concern over COVID-19, delaying care. Conclusions: Thoracic surgeons played a critical role in the COVID-19 pandemic response in both technical patient care and administrative capacities. Primary care responsibilities included the development, administration and delivery of tracheostomy protocols, and the care of down-stream airway complications. Thoracic surgeons were critical in triage decisions to minimize the impact of COVID-19 on thoracic cancer care. Lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic may provide insight into opportunities to promote collaboration in thoracic surgery and facilitate improved care delivery in future settings of resource limitation.
ABSTRACT
Background: Implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways for patients undergoing anatomic lung resection have been reported at individual institutions. We hypothesized that an ERAS pathway can be successfully implemented across a large healthcare system including different types of hospital settings (academic, academic-affiliated, community). Methods: An expert panel with representation from each hospital within a healthcare system was convened to establish a thoracic ERAS pathway for patients undergoing anatomic lung resection and to develop tools and analytics to ensure consistent application. The protocol was translated into an order set and pathway within the electronic health record (EHR). Iterative implementation was performed with recording of the processes involved. Barriers and facilitators to implementation were recorded. Results: Development and implementation of the protocol took 13 months from conception to rollout. Considerable change management was needed for consensus and incorporation into practice. Facilitators of change included peer accountability, incorporating ERAS care elements into the EHR, and conducting case reviews with timely feedback on protocol deviations. Barriers included institutional cultural differences, agreement in defining mindful deviation from the ERAS protocol, lack of access to specific coded data, and resource scarcity caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Support from the hospital system's executive leadership and institutional commitment to quality improvement helped overcome barriers and maintain momentum. Conclusions: Development and implementation of a health-system wide thoracic ERAS protocol for anatomic lung resections across a six-hospital health system requires a multidisciplinary team approach. Barriers can be overcome though multidisciplinary team engagement and executive leadership support.