Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38783341›Full record

ArticlePatient safety in surgery2024

Clinicians' perceptions of "enhanced recovery after surgery" (ERAS) protocols to improve patient safety in surgery: a national survey from Australia.

Josephine Lovegrove, Georgia Tobiano, Wendy Chaboyer, Joan Carlini, Rhea Liang, Keith Addy, Brigid M Gillespie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient safety in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Developing Implementation Strategies for the Adoption of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocols: A Co-Design Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

7 authors.

Josephine LovegroveNHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, 1 Parklands Dr, 4222, Southport, QLD, Australia.
Georgia TobianoNHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, 1 Parklands Dr, 4222, Southport, QLD, Australia.
Wendy ChaboyerNHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, 1 Parklands Dr, 4222, Southport, QLD, Australia.
Joan CarliniDepartment of Marketing, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, 1 Parklands Dr, 4222, Southport, QLD, Australia.
Rhea LiangFaculty of Health Sciences, Bond University, 14 University Dr, 4226, Robina, QLD, Australia.
Keith AddyGold Coast Hospital & Health Service, Gold Coast University Hospital, 1 Hospital Blvd, 4215, Southport, QLD, Australia.
Brigid M GillespieNHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, 1 Parklands Dr, 4222, Southport, QLD, Australia. b.gillespie@griffith.eduau.

Funding

NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care APP1196436
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurgical patients are at risk of postoperative complications, which may lead to increased morbidity, mortality, hospital length-of-stay and healthcare costs. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) protocols are evidence-based and have demonstrated effectiveness in decreasing complications and associated consequences. However, their adoption in Australia has been limited and the reason for this is unclear. This study aimed to describe clinicians' perceptions of ERAS protocols in Australia.

methodsA national online survey of anaesthetists, surgeons and nurses was undertaken. Invitations to participate were distributed via emails from professional colleges. The 30-item survey captured respondent characteristics, ERAS perceptions, beliefs, education and learning preferences and future planning considerations. The final question was open-ended for elaboration of perceptions of ERAS. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to describe and compare group differences across disciplines relative to perceptions of ERAS.

resultsThe sample included 178 responses (116 nurses, 65.2%; 36 surgeons, 20.2%; 26 anaesthetists, 14.6%) across six states and two territories. More than half (n = 104; 58.8%) had used ERAS protocols in patient care, and most perceived they were 'very knowledgeable' (n = 24; 13.6%) or 'knowledgeable' (n = 71; 40.3%) of ERAS. However, fewer nurses had cared for a patient using ERAS (p <.01) and nurses reported lower levels of knowledge (p <.001) than their medical counterparts. Most respondents agreed ERAS protocols improved patient care and financial efficiency and were a reasonable time investment (overall Md 3-5), but nurses generally recorded lower levels of agreement (p.013 to < 0.001). Lack of information was the greatest barrier to ERAS knowledge (n = 97; 62.6%), while seminars/lectures from international and national leaders were the preferred learning method (n = 59; 41.3%). Most supported broad implementation of ERAS (n = 130; 87.8%).

conclusionThere is a need to promote ERAS and provide education, which may be nuanced based on the results, to improve implementation in Australia. Nurses particularly need to be engaged in ERAS protocols given their significant presence throughout the surgical journey. There is also a need to co-design implementation strategies with stakeholders that target identified facilitators and barriers, including lack of support from senior administration, managers and clinicians and resource constraints.

Indexed as

Clinical protocolsCritical pathwaysGeneral surgeryGuideline adherenceIntraoperative complicationsOperating roomsPostoperative complicationsSurgical procedures, operative

Identifiers

PMID38783341
PMCPMC11119013

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.