2 research outputs found

    Length of Stay: An Inappropriate Readout of the Success of Enhanced Recovery Programs

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs are designed to reduce hospital length of stay by shortening the postoperative recovery period. The intended effect of an accelerated recovery on the length of stay may be frustrated by a delayed discharge. This study was designed to assess the influence of an ERAS program on the proportion, appropriateness, and extent of delay in discharge. METHODS: Patients who enrolled in the ERAS program (n = 121) between 2003 and 2006 were compared with 52 patients who were managed traditionally in 2001. RESULTS: Ninety percent of the pre-ERAS patients and 87% of the ERAS patients were not discharged on the day that discharge criteria were fulfilled. The additional stay of 59% of the pre-ERAS patients and 69% of the ERAS patients was inappropriate. Wound care (15% in the pre-ERAS and 3% of the ERAS group) and observation of any symptoms pointing to an anastomotic leakage (10% in both groups) were the most important reasons for a medical appropriate delay of discharge. The extent of delay in discharge decreased significantly from a median of two days in the pre-ERAS group to a median of 1 day in the ERAS group (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in length of stay up to a median of 2 days after start of an enhanced recovery program may relate to changes in organization of care and not to a shorter recovery period. Recovery statistics should replace or at least be added to the length of stay as outcome of enhanced recovery programs. AD - Department of Surgery, University Hospital Maastricht, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands. [email protected]

    Interventions aimed at reducing problems in adult patients discharged from hospital to home: a systematic meta-review

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many patients encounter a variety of problems after discharge from hospital and many discharge (planning and support) interventions have been developed and studied. These primary studies have already been synthesized in several literature reviews with conflicting conclusions. We therefore set out a systematic review of the reviews examining discharge interventions. The objective was to synthesize the evidence presented in literature on the effectiveness of interventions aimed to reduce post-discharge problems in adults discharged home from an acute general care hospital.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A comprehensive search of seventeen literature databases and twenty-five websites was performed for the period 1994–2004 to find relevant reviews. A three-stage inclusion process consisting of initial sifting, checking full-text papers on inclusion criteria, and methodological assessment, was performed independently by two reviewers. Data on effects were synthesized by use of narrative and tabular methods.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Fifteen systematic reviews met our inclusion criteria. All reviews had to deal with considerable heterogeneity in interventions, populations and outcomes, making synthesizing and pooling difficult.</p> <p>Although a statistical significant effect was occasionally found, most review authors reached no firm conclusions that the discharge interventions they studied were effective.</p> <p>We found limited evidence that some interventions may improve knowledge of patients, may help in keeping patients at home or may reduce readmissions to hospital. Interventions that combine discharge planning and discharge support tend to lead to the greatest effects. There is little evidence that discharge interventions have an impact on length of stay, discharge destination or dependency at discharge. We found no evidence that discharge interventions have a positive impact on the physical status of patients after discharge, on health care use after discharge, or on costs.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Based on fifteen high quality systematic reviews, there is some evidence that some interventions may have a positive impact, particularly those with educational components and those that combine pre-discharge and post-discharge interventions. However, on the whole there is only limited summarized evidence that discharge planning and discharge support interventions have a positive impact on patient status at hospital discharge, on patient functioning after discharge, on health care use after discharge, or on costs.</p
    corecore