Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Feb;73(2):554-563.
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.06.106. Epub 2020 Jul 16.

Implementation of an enhanced recovery program for lower extremity bypass

Adam Witcher  1 , John Axley  2 , Zdenek Novak  2 , Maria Laygo-Prickett  2 , Meredith Guthrie  3 , Anisa Xhaja  3 , Daniel I Chu  4 , S Danielle Brokus  2 , Emily L Spangler  2 , Marc A Passman  2 , Katharine L McGinigle  5 , Benjamin J Pearce  2 , Ryne Schlitz  6 , Roland T Short 3rd  6 , Jeffrey W Simmons  6 , Richard C Cross  6 , Graeme E McFarland  2 , Adam W Beck  7
Affiliations
Free article

Implementation of an enhanced recovery program for lower extremity bypass

Adam Witcher et al. J Vasc Surg. 2021 Feb.
Free article

Abstract

Objective: Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have gained wide acceptance across multiple surgical disciplines to improve postoperative outcomes and to decrease hospital length of stay (LOS). However, there is limited information in the existing literature for vascular patients. We describe the implementation and early results of an ERP and barriers to its implementation for lower extremity bypass surgery. Our intention is to provide a framework to assist with implementation of similar ERPs.

Methods: Using the plan, do, check, adjust methodology, a multidisciplinary team was assembled. A database was used to collect information on patient-, procedure-, and ERP-specific metrics. We then retrospectively analyzed patients' demographics and outcomes.

Results: During 9 months, an ERP (n = 57) was successfully developed and implemented spanning preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases. ERP and non-ERP patient demographics were statistically similar. Early successes include 97% use of fascia iliaca block and multimodal analgesia administration in 81%. Barriers included only 47% of patients achieving day of surgery mobilization and 19% receiving celecoxib preoperatively. ERP patients had decreased total and postoperative LOS compared with non-ERP patients (n = 190) with a mean (standard deviation) total LOS of 8.32 (8.4) days vs 11.14 (10.1) days (P = .056) and postoperative LOS of 6.12 (6.02) days vs 7.98 (7.52) days (P = .089). There was significant decrease in observed to expected postoperative LOS (1.28 [0.66] vs 1.82 [1.38]; P = .005). Variable and total costs for ERP patients were significantly reduced ($13,208 [$9930] vs $18,777 [$19,118; P < .01] and $29,865 [$22,110] vs $40,328 [$37,820; P = .01], respectively).

Conclusions: Successful implementation of ERP for lower extremity bypass carries notable challenges but can have a significant impact on practice patterns. Further adjustment of our current protocol is anticipated, but early results are promising. Implementation of a vascular surgery ERP reduced variable and total costs and decreased total and postoperative LOS. We believe this protocol can easily be implemented at other institutions using the pathway outlined.

Keywords: ERP; Enhanced recovery program; Length of stay; Lower extremity bypass; Protocol.

PubMed Disclaimer

MeSH terms