Advertisement

An enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for cesarean delivery decreases hospital stay and cost

      Background

      Enhanced recovery after surgery pathways provide a multidisciplinary, evidence-based approach to the care of surgical patients. They have been shown to decrease postoperative length of stay and cost in several surgical subspecialties, including gynecology, but have not been well-studied in obstetric patients who undergo cesarean delivery.

      Objective

      We sought to determine whether the implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for cesarean delivery would decrease postoperative length of stay and postoperative direct cost compared with historic controls.

      Study Design

      We conducted a retrospective cohort study that compared postoperative length of stay and postoperative direct cost among women on the enhanced recovery after surgery cesarean delivery pathway in the first year of implementation (April 1, 2017, to March 31, 2018; n=531) compared with historic controls (March 1, 2016, to February 28, 2017; n=661). Literature review informed the development of a prototype enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for cesarean delivery based on best practices from previous enhanced recovery after surgery experience in obstetrics (if available) or from other surgical disciplines if there were no available data for obstetrics. When there was not relevant published evidence from obstetrics, the taskforce used clinical experience and expert opinion to develop the pathway. The enhanced recovery after surgery cesarean delivery pathway included preadmission patient education and preoperative, intrapartum, and postoperative elements. Some components reflected standard obstetric care, and others were specific to the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway. Women with pregestational diabetes mellitus who were receiving insulin therapy before pregnancy, women with preeclampsia with severe features, women with complex pain needs, and women with surgical complications were excluded from baseline and implementation groups. Enhanced recovery after surgery cesarean delivery pathway participation was determined by order set usage. Analysis was stratified for women who underwent planned (no labor; n=530) and unplanned (labor; n=662) cesarean delivery. Demographic and clinical characteristics, postoperative length of stay, postoperative direct cost, and readmission rates for the baseline and implementation groups were compared with the use of chi-square and t-tests.

      Results

      During the first year of implementation, 531 of 640 eligible women (83%) were included in the enhanced recovery after surgery cesarean delivery pathway. Body mass index was marginally higher in the baseline group for unplanned cesarean delivery (32.5±7.1 vs 31.4±6.7 kg/m2; P=.04). Otherwise there were no significant differences in demographic or maternal clinical characteristics between baseline or implementation groups overall or for planned or unplanned cesarean delivery. Compared with baseline, implementation of the enhanced recovery after surgery cesarean delivery pathway resulted in a significant decrease in postoperative length of stay by 7.8% or 4.86 hours overall (P<.001) and for both planned (P=.001) and unplanned (P=.002) cesarean delivery. Total postoperative direct costs decreased by 8.4% or $642.85 per patient overall (P<.001) and for both planned (P<.001) and unplanned (P<.001) cesarean delivery. There were no significant differences in readmission rates.

      Conclusion

      Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for women who had planned or unplanned cesarean delivery was associated with significantly decreased postoperative length of stay and significant direct cost-savings per patient, without an increase in hospital readmissions. Given that cesarean delivery is 1 of the most common surgical procedures performed in the United States, positively impacting postoperative length of stay and direct cost for women who undergo cesarean delivery could have significant healthcare cost-savings.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Murphy S.L.
        • Mathews T.J.
        • Martin J.A.
        • Minkovitz C.S.
        • Strobino D.M.
        Annual summary of vital statistics: 2013–2014.
        Pediatrics. 2017; : 139https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-3239
        • Ljungqvist O.
        • Scott M.
        • Fearon K.C.
        Enhanced recovery after surgery: a review.
        JAMA Surg. 2017; 152: 292-298
        • Fearon K.C.H.
        • Ljungqvist O.
        • Von Meyenfeldt M.
        • et al.
        Enhanced recovery after surgery: a consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection.
        Clin Nutr. 2005; 24: 466-477
        • Miralpeix E.
        • Nick A.M.
        • Meyer L.A.
        • et al.
        A call for new standard of care in perioperative gynecologic oncology practice: impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2016; 141: 371-378
        • Nelson G.
        • Kalogera E.
        • Dowdy S.C.
        Enhanced recovery pathways in gynecologic oncology.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2014; 135: 586-594
        • Scheib S.A.
        • Thomassee M.
        • Kenner J.L.
        Enhanced recovery after surgery in gynecology: a review of the literature.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019; 26: 327-343
        • Chapman J.S.
        • Roddy E.
        • Ueda S.
        • Brooks R.
        • Chen L.
        • Chen L.
        Enhanced recovery pathways for improving outcomes after minimally invasive gynecology oncology surgery.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 128: 138-144
        • Kalogera E.
        • Bakkum-Gamez J.N.
        • Jankowski C.J.
        • et al.
        Enhanced recovery in gynecologic surgery.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 122: 319-328
        • Modesitt S.C.
        • Sarosiek B.M.
        • Trowbridge E.R.
        • et al.
        Enhanced recovery implementation in major gynecologic surgeries: effect of care standardization.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 128: 457-466
        • Yoong W.
        • Sivashanmugarajan V.
        • Relph S.
        • et al.
        Can enhanced recovery pathways improve outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy? Cohort control study.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014; 21: 83-89
        • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
        ACOG Committee Opinion No. 750: perioperative pathways: enhanced recovery after surgery.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 132: e120-e130
        • Abell D.
        • Long O.
        • Skelton V.
        • Penna L.
        • Dasan J.
        • Sharafudeen S.
        Enhanced recovery in obstetrics.
        Int J Obstet Anesth. 2013; 22: 349-350
        • Wrench I.J.
        • Allison A.
        • Galimberti A.
        • Radley S.
        • Wilson M.J.
        Introduction of enhanced recovery for elective caesarean section enabling next day discharge: a tertiary centre experience.
        Int J Obstet Anesth. 2015; 24: 124-130
        • Vickers R.
        • Das B.
        Enhanced recovery in obstetrics.
        Int J Obstet Anesth. 2013; 22: 349
        • Wilson R.D.
        • Caughey A.B.
        • Wood S.L.
        • et al.
        Guidelines for antenatal and preoperative care in cesarean delivery: enhanced recovery after surgery society recommendations (part 1).
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 219: 523.e1-523.e15
        • Caughey A.B.
        • Wood S.L.
        • Macones G.A.
        • et al.
        Guidelines for intraoperative care in cesarean delivery: Enhanced recovery after surgery society recommendations (part 2).
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 219: 533-544
        • Macones G.A.
        • Caughey A.B.
        • Wood S.L.
        • et al.
        Guidelines for postoperative care in cesarean delivery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) society recommendations (part 3).
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 221: 247.e1-247.e9
        • Lassen K.
        • Hannemann P.
        • Ljungqvist O.
        • et al.
        Patterns in current perioperative practice: survey of colorectal surgeons in five northern European countries.
        BMJ. 2005; 330: 1420-1421
        • Ament S.M.C.
        • Gillissen F.
        • Moser A.
        • et al.
        Identification of promising strategies to sustain improvements in hospital practice: a qualitative case study.
        BMC Health Serv Res. 2014; 14: 641
        • Gotlib Conn L.
        • McKenzie M.
        • Pearsall E.A.
        • McLeod R.S.
        Successful implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery programme for elective colorectal surgery: a process evaluation of champions’ experiences.
        Implement Sci. 2015; 10: 99
        • Pearsall E.A.
        • Meghji Z.
        • Pitzul K.B.
        • et al.
        A qualitative study to understand the barriers and enablers in implementing an enhanced recovery after surgery program.
        Ann Surg. 2015; 261: 92-96