Recovery In Elective Surgery Research Articles

Lack of regional pathways impact on surgical delay: Analysis of the Orthopaedic Trauma Hospital Outcomes–Patient Operative Delays (ORTHOPOD) study

IntroductionCurrent practice following injury within the United Kingdom is to receive surgery, at the institution of first contact regardless of ability to provide timely intervention and inconsiderate of neighbouring hospital resource and capacity. This can lead to a mismatch of demand and capacity, delayed surgery and stress within hospital systems, particularly with regards to elective services. We demonstrate through a multicentre, multinational study, the impact of this at scale. MethodologyORTHOPOD data collection period was between 22/08/2022 and 16/10/2022 and consisted of two arms. Arm 1 captured orthopaedic trauma caseload and capacity in terms of sessions available per centre and patients awaiting surgery per centre per given week. Arm 2 recorded patient and injury demographics, time of decision making, outpatient and inpatient timeframes as well as time to surgery. Hand and spine cases were excluded. For this regional comparison, regional trauma networks with a minimum of four centres enroled onto the ORTHOPOD study were exclusively analysed. ResultsFollowing analysis of 11,202 patient episodes across 30 hospitals we found no movement of any patient between hospitals to enable prompt surgery. There is no current system to move patients, between regional centres despite clear discrepancies in workload per capacity across the United Kingdom. Many patients wait for days for surgery when simple transfer to a neighbouring hospital (within 10 miles in many instances) would result in prompt care within national guidelines. ConclusionMost trauma patients in the United Kingdom are managed exclusively at the place of first presentation, with no consideration of alternative pathways to local hospitals that may, at that time, offer increased operative capacity and a shorter waiting time. There is no oversight of trauma workload per capacity at neighbouring hospitals within a regional trauma network. This leads to a marked disparity in waiting time to surgery, and subsequently it can be inferred but not proven, poorer patient experience and outcomes. This inevitably leads to a strain on the overall trauma system and across several centres can impact on elective surgery recovery. We propose the consideration of inter-regional network collaboration, aligned with the Major Trauma System.

Modeling the elective vascular surgery recovery after coronavirus disease 2019: Implications for moving forward

ObjectiveThe delays in elective surgery caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have resulted in a substantial backlog of cases. In the present study, we sought to determine the estimated time to recovery for vascular surgery procedures delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic in a regional health system. MethodsUsing data from a 35-hospital regional vascular surgical collaborative consisting of all hospitals performing vascular surgery in the state of Michigan, we estimated the number of delayed surgical cases for adults undergoing carotid endarterectomy, carotid stenting, endovascular and open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, and lower extremity bypass. We used seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average models to predict the surgical volume in the absence of the COVID-19 pandemic and historical data to predict the elective surgical recovery time. ResultsThe median statewide monthly vascular surgical volume for the study period was 439 procedures, with a maximum statewide monthly case volume of 519 procedures. For the month of April 2020, the elective vascular surgery procedural volume decreased by ∼90%. Significant variability was seen in the estimated hospital capacity and estimated number of backlogged cases, with the recovery of elective cases estimated to require ∼8 months. If hospitals across the collaborative were to share the burden of backlogged cases, the recovery could be shortened to ∼3 months. ConclusionsIn the present study of vascular surgical volume in a regional health collaborative, elective surgical procedures decreased by 90%, resulting in a backlog of >700 cases. The recovery time if all hospitals in the collaborative were to share the burden of backlogged cases would be reduced from 8 months to 3 months, underscoring the necessity of regional and statewide policies to minimize patient harm by delays in recovery for elective surgery.

Achieving a 'top-down' change agenda by driving and supporting a collaborative 'bottom-up' process: case study of a large-scale enhanced recovery programme.

There is increasing recognition that organisations need to look beyond their boundaries for new innovations. However, the introduction and implementation of best practice that has been developed externally may need different processes of implementation if a successful change process is going to be achieved. Using an enhanced recovery programme as an example, we report a case study that combines the best of a top-down approach with the principles of bottom-up collaborative working to successfully embed a large-scale quality improvement programme that was commissioned to improve the adoption of enhanced recovery in elective surgery. We describe a large-scale change programme that was established, coordinated and driven from within a central ‘top’ organisation but delivered and owned locally by individual organisations working collaboratively across southeast region of England. We discuss why we believe our methodology of implementing this programme was successful, the important triggers for success and the lessons we learned from the programme.