The Impact of Enhanced Recovery Pathways in Head and Neck Surgery: A Systematic Review

Mackie-Savage Ursula, Flynn Denise
{"title":"The Impact of Enhanced Recovery Pathways in Head and Neck Surgery: A Systematic Review","authors":"Mackie-Savage Ursula, Flynn Denise","doi":"10.36959/605/567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have been implemented across multiple surgical specialties and have been found to be successful in reducing post-operative complications and length of stay (LOS) in hospital. They have only more recently been adopted by Head and Neck surgery but there is now a sufficient body of evidence which would benefit from consolidation and review. The purpose of this review is to determine what impact ERAS pathways have on patient outcomes and post-operative recovery following Head and Neck surgery. Methods: A literature search of Pubmed, CINAHL and Google Scholar was conducted. Results were limited to publication between 2013-2021 and those written in English. The search terms used were “enhanced recovery” and “head and neck surgery” or “ERAS” and “head and neck surgery” or “head and neck surgery” and “clinical pathway” or “head and neck surgery” and “fast track”. Results: The search yielded 17 papers for inclusion in the review. 16 of the studies were cohort studies (50% prospective and 50% retrospective) with sample sizes ranging from 31-445. Five studies observed a statistically significant reduction in length of stay (LOS) in intensive care for those in the ERAS cohort, with an average reduction of 3.42 days. Additionally, 73% of studies (n = 11) reported a statistically significant reduction in overall LOS for ERAS patients. Lower analgesic requirements as measured by morphine equivalent dosing (MED) were reported (17.5 mg ± 46 gmg ERAS vs. 82.7 ± 116 mg in the control (p =< 0.001) in combination with lower average pain scores (2.6 ± 1.8 ERAS vs. 3.6 ± 1.9 control (p =< 0.001)). Only one study identified a statistically significant reduction in post-operative complications (pulmonary) of 30% in the ERAS cohort vs. 63% in the control (p =< 0.001). Conclusions: There is evidence to suggest that ERAS pathways can impact positively on post-operative recovery following Head and Neck surgery by reducing overall LOS, LOS in ITU and opioid requirements. However, current evidence is limited and does not give insight into long-term outcomes or the patient experience of ERAS.","PeriodicalId":93302,"journal":{"name":"International journal of head and neck surgery","volume":"77 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of head and neck surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36959/605/567","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have been implemented across multiple surgical specialties and have been found to be successful in reducing post-operative complications and length of stay (LOS) in hospital. They have only more recently been adopted by Head and Neck surgery but there is now a sufficient body of evidence which would benefit from consolidation and review. The purpose of this review is to determine what impact ERAS pathways have on patient outcomes and post-operative recovery following Head and Neck surgery. Methods: A literature search of Pubmed, CINAHL and Google Scholar was conducted. Results were limited to publication between 2013-2021 and those written in English. The search terms used were “enhanced recovery” and “head and neck surgery” or “ERAS” and “head and neck surgery” or “head and neck surgery” and “clinical pathway” or “head and neck surgery” and “fast track”. Results: The search yielded 17 papers for inclusion in the review. 16 of the studies were cohort studies (50% prospective and 50% retrospective) with sample sizes ranging from 31-445. Five studies observed a statistically significant reduction in length of stay (LOS) in intensive care for those in the ERAS cohort, with an average reduction of 3.42 days. Additionally, 73% of studies (n = 11) reported a statistically significant reduction in overall LOS for ERAS patients. Lower analgesic requirements as measured by morphine equivalent dosing (MED) were reported (17.5 mg ± 46 gmg ERAS vs. 82.7 ± 116 mg in the control (p =< 0.001) in combination with lower average pain scores (2.6 ± 1.8 ERAS vs. 3.6 ± 1.9 control (p =< 0.001)). Only one study identified a statistically significant reduction in post-operative complications (pulmonary) of 30% in the ERAS cohort vs. 63% in the control (p =< 0.001). Conclusions: There is evidence to suggest that ERAS pathways can impact positively on post-operative recovery following Head and Neck surgery by reducing overall LOS, LOS in ITU and opioid requirements. However, current evidence is limited and does not give insight into long-term outcomes or the patient experience of ERAS.
增强恢复途径对头颈部手术的影响:一项系统综述
背景:增强术后恢复(ERAS)途径已在多个外科专科实施,并被发现在减少术后并发症和住院时间(LOS)方面取得了成功。它们只是最近才被头颈外科采用,但现在有足够的证据可以从巩固和审查中受益。本综述的目的是确定ERAS通路对头颈部手术后患者预后和术后恢复的影响。方法:检索Pubmed、CINAHL和b谷歌Scholar的文献。研究结果仅限于2013-2021年间发表的英文论文。所使用的搜寻关键词为“促进康复”、“头颈手术”或“ERAS”、“头颈手术”或“头颈手术”、“临床路径”或“头颈手术”及“快速通道”。结果:检索出17篇论文纳入综述。16项研究为队列研究(50%为前瞻性研究,50%为回顾性研究),样本量从31-445人不等。五项研究观察到ERAS队列患者在重症监护室的住院时间(LOS)有统计学意义上的显著减少,平均减少3.42天。此外,73%的研究(n = 11)报告了ERAS患者总体LOS的统计学显著降低。吗啡当量剂量(MED)测量的镇痛需求较低(ERAS为17.5 mg±46 mg,对照组为82.7±116 mg, p =< 0.001),平均疼痛评分较低(ERAS为2.6±1.8,对照组为3.6±1.9,p =< 0.001)。只有一项研究发现ERAS组术后并发症(肺部)减少了30%,而对照组减少了63% (p =< 0.001)。结论:有证据表明,ERAS通路可以通过降低总体LOS、ITU中的LOS和阿片类药物需求,对头颈部手术后的术后恢复产生积极影响。然而,目前的证据是有限的,并没有深入了解ERAS的长期结果或患者体验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信