Patient-Reported Outcomes Accurately Measure the Value of an Enhanced Recovery Program in Liver Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery (ER) pathways have become increasingly integrated into surgical practice. Studies that compare ER and traditional pathways often focus on outcomes confined to inpatient hospitalization and rarely assess a patient's functional recovery. The aim of this study was to compare functional outcomes for patients treated on an Enhanced Recovery in Liver Surgery (ERLS) pathway vs a traditional pathway. STUDY DESIGN: One hundred and eighteen hepatectomy patients rated symptom severity and life interference using the validated MD Anderson Symptom Inventory preoperatively and postoperatively at every outpatient visit until 31 days after surgery. The ERLS protocol included patient education, narcotic-sparing anesthesia and analgesia, diet advancement, restrictive fluid administration, early ambulation, and avoidance of drains and tubes. RESULTS: Seventy-five ERLS pathway patients were clinically comparable with 43 patients simultaneously treated on a traditional pathway. The ERLS patients reported lower immediate postoperative pain scores and experienced fewer complications and decreased length of stay. As measured by symptom burden on life interference, ERLS patients were more likely to return to baseline functional status in a shorter time interval. The only independent predictor of faster return to baseline interference levels was treatment on an ERLS pathway (p = 0.021; odds ratio = 2.62). In addition, ERLS pathway patients were more likely to return to intended oncologic therapy (95% vs 87%) at a shorter time interval compared to patients on the traditional pathway (44.7 vs 60.2 days). CONCLUSIONS: In oncologic liver surgery, enhanced recovery's primary mechanism of action is reduction in life interference by postoperative surgical symptoms, allowing patients to return sooner to normal function and adjuvant cancer therapies.

Incomplete reporting of enhanced recovery elements and its impact on achieving quality improvement.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery (ER) protocols are used widely in surgical practice. As protocols are multidisciplinary with multiple components, it is difficult to compare and contrast reports. The present study examined compliance and transferability to clinical practice among ER publications related to colorectal surgery. METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register databases were searched for current colorectal ER manuscripts. Each publication was assessed for the number of ER elements, whether the element was explained sufficiently so that it could be transferred to clinical practice, and compliance with the ER element. RESULTS: Some 50 publications met the reporting criteria for inclusion. A total of 22 ER elements were described. The median number of elements included in each publication was 9, and the median number of included patients was 130. The elements most commonly included in ER pathways were early postoperative diet advancement (49, 98 per cent) and early mobilization (47, 94 per cent). Early diet advancement was sufficiently explained in 43 (86 per cent) of the 50 publications, but only 22 (45 per cent) of 49 listing the variable reported compliance. The explanation for early mobilization was satisfactory in 41 (82 per cent) of the 50 publications, although only 14 (30 per cent) of 47 listing the variable reported compliance. Other ER elements had similar rates of explanation and compliance. The most frequently analysed outcome measures were morbidity (49, 98 per cent), length of stay (47, 94 per cent) and mortality (45, 90 per cent). CONCLUSION: The current standard of reporting is frequently incomplete. To transfer knowledge and facilitate implementation of pathways that demonstrate improvements in perioperative care and recovery, a consistent structured reporting platform is needed.