Enhanced recovery pathway for radical prostatectomy: Implementation and evaluation in a universal healthcare system

Enhanced recovery pathways are standardized, multidisciplinary, consensus-based tools that provide guidelines for evidence-based decision-making. This study evaluates the impact of the implementation of a clinical care pathway on patient outcomes following radical prostatectomy in a universal health...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Canadian Urological Association journal 2014-12, Vol.8 (11-12), p.418-423
Hauptverfasser: Abou-Haidar, Hiba, Abourbih, Samuel, Braganza, David, Qaoud, Talal Al, Lee, Lawrence, Carli, Franco, Watson, Deborah, Aprikian, Armen G, Tanguay, Simon, Feldman, Liane S, Kassouf, Wassim
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Enhanced recovery pathways are standardized, multidisciplinary, consensus-based tools that provide guidelines for evidence-based decision-making. This study evaluates the impact of the implementation of a clinical care pathway on patient outcomes following radical prostatectomy in a universal healthcare system. Medical charts of 200 patients with prostate cancer who underwent open and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy at a single academic hospital from 2009 to 2012 were reviewed. A group of 100 consecutive patients' pre-pathway implementation was compared with 99 consecutive patients' post-pathway implementation. Duration of hospital stay, complications, post-discharge emergency department visits and readmissions were compared between the 2 groups. Length of hospital stay decreased from a median of 3 (inter-quartile range [IQR] 4 to 3 days) days in the pre-pathway group to a median of 2 (IQR 3 to 2 days) days in the post-pathway group regardless of surgical approach (p < 0.0001). Complication rates, emergency department visits and hospital readmissions were not significantly different in the pre- and post-pathway groups (17% vs. 21%, p = 0.80; 12% vs. 12%, p = 0.95; and 3% vs. 7%, p = 0.18, respectively). These findings were consistent after stratification by surgical approach. Limitations of our study include lack of assessment of patient satisfaction, and the retrospective study design. The implementation of a standardized, multidisciplinary clinical care pathway for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy improved efficiency without increasing complication rates or hospital readmissions.
ISSN:1911-6470
1920-1214
DOI:10.5489/cuaj.2114