ReviewWorld journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery2022
Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for head and neck cancer patients: Considerations and best practices.
Review in World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced Recovery Pathways in Head and Neck Cancer Surgery: Recovery and Safety in an Updated Meta-analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Prehabilitation in Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence and Clinical Perspectives.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for head and neck cancer patients: Considerations and best practices.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been developed in numerous surgical specialties as a means of systematically improving patient recovery, functional outcomes, cost savings, and resource utilization. Such multidisciplinary initiatives seek to minimize variability in several aspects of perioperative patient care, helping to reduce inpatient length of hospital stay, complications, and the overall resource and financial burden of surgical care. Head and neck oncology patients stand to benefit from the implementation of comprehensive ERAS protocols, as these patients have complex medical needs that may dramatically impact multiple aspects of their recovery, including breathing, eating, nutrition, pain, speech, swallowing, and communication. Implementing ERAS protocols for head and neck cancer patients may present unique challenges, and require significant interdisciplinary coordination and collaboration. We therefore sought to provide a comprehensive guide to the planning and institution of such ERAS systems at institutions undertaking care of head and neck cancer patients. Key elements to consider in the implementation of successful ERAS protocols for this population include organizing a team consisting of frontline leaders such as nursing staff, medical specialists, and associated health professionals; designing interventions based on systematically evaluated, high-quality literature; and instituting a clear methodology for regularly updating protocols and auditing the success or potential limitations of a given intervention. Potential obstacles to the success of ERAS interventions for head and neck cancer patients include challenges in systematically tracking progress of the protocol, as well as resource limitations in a given health system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.