Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38475839›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Views and experiences of healthcare professionals and patients on the implementation of a 23-hour accelerated enhanced recovery programme: a mixed-method study.

Misha A T Sier, Eva Godina, Thaís T T Tweed, Imane Daher, Jan H M B Stoot

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Misha A T SierDepartment of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Henri Dunantstraat 5, Heerlen, 6419 PC, The Netherlands. m.sier@zuyderland.nl.
Eva GodinaDepartment of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Henri Dunantstraat 5, Heerlen, 6419 PC, The Netherlands.
Thaís T T TweedSchool of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism (NUTRIM), Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, 6229 ER, The Netherlands.
Imane DaherDepartment of Gastroenterology, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Henri Dunantstraat 5, Heerlen, 6419 PC, the Netherlands.
Jan H M B StootDepartment of Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Henri Dunantstraat 5, Heerlen, 6419 PC, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLZuyderland Medisch Centrum · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn accumulating body of research suggests that an accelerating enhanced recovery after colon surgery protocol is beneficial for patients, however, to obtain these effects, adherence to all elements of the protocol is important. The implementation of complex interventions, such as the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol (ERAS), and their strict adherence have proven to be difficult. The same challenges can be expected in the implementation of the accelerated Enhanced Recovery Pathways (ERPs). This study aimed to understand the perspectives of both healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients on the locally studied acCelerated enHanced recovery After SurgEry (CHASE) protocol.

methodsFor this mixed-method study, HCPs who provided CHASE care and patients who received CHASE care were recruited using purposive sampling. Ethical approval was obtained by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Zuyderland Medical Centre (NL71804.096.19, METCZ20190130, October 2022). Semi-structured, in-depth, one-on-one interviews were conducted with HCPs (n = 13) and patients (n = 11). The interviews consisted of a qualitative and quantitative part, the protocol evaluation and the Measurement Instrument or Determinant of Innovations-structured questionnaire. We explored the perspectives, barriers, and facilitators of the CHASE protocol implementation. The interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and analysed independently by two researchers using direct content analysis.

resultsThe results showed that overall, HCPs support the implementation of the CHASE protocol. The enablers were easy access to the protocol, the relevance of the intervention, and thorough patient education. Some of the reported barriers included the difficulty of recognizing CHASE patients, the need for regular feedback, and the updates on the implementation progress. Most patients were enthusiastic about early discharge after surgery and expressed satisfaction with the care they received. On the other hand, the patients sometimes received different information from different HCPs, considered the information to be too extensive and few experienced some discomfort with CHASE care.

conclusionBringing CHASE care into practice was challenging and required adaptation from HCPs. The experiences of HCPs showed that the protocol can be improved further, and the mostly positive experiences of patients are a motivation for this improvement. These results yielded practical implications to improve the implementation of accelerated ERPs.

Indexed as

Enhanced Recovery After SurgeryHealth PersonnelDelivery of Health CareHumansQualitative ResearchAccelerated recoveryColorectal cancer surgeryHealth care professional perspectivePatient perspectivePerioperative cancer care

Identifiers

PMID38475839
PMCPMC10935952
OpenAlexW4392755714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.