Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Enhanced recovery protocols in colonic surgery: retrospective cohort analysis of economic impact from an institutional point of view

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Despite increasing evidence supporting the beneficial effects of enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs), their accurate economic impact on institutions remains lacking. The aim of this study was to analyze ERP economic impact in a French center in order to further encourage implementation.

Methods

All patients who underwent elective laparoscopic right or left colectomy for benign or malignant pathology from 2014 to 2017 in a single center were retrospectively reviewed. ERP according to national recommendations was effective starting November 2015. Perioperative data and all direct costs borne by the institution were collected for each patient. Patients who underwent colectomy before and after ERP implementation were compared.

Results

Overall, 288 patients were included of which 144 received conventional perioperative care (CC) and 144 received ERP. There were 161 (56%) men, median age was 71 (28–92) years, and 242 (84%) patients underwent surgery for malignant disease. Operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and severe postoperative complications were similar between both groups. ERP was associated with reduced Clavien-Dindo I–II postoperative complications (15% vs. 28%, p = 0.010) and overall in-hospital stay (6 vs. 7 days, p = 0.003). Overall institutional costs were lower in the ERP group although difference was not statistically significant (7022 vs. 7501 euros, p = 0.098). Estimated savings per patient reached a mean of 480 euros.

Conclusions

In a tertiary French center, ERP was associated with reduced postoperative morbidity and in-hospital stay resulting in considerable cost savings. Although not significant, ERP resulted in positive economic impact even in an early implementation phase.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alves A, Panis Y, Mathieu P, Mantion G, Kwiatkowski F, Slim K (2005) Postoperative mortality and morbidity in French patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Results of a prospective multicenter study. Arch Surg 140:278–283

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Alfonsi P, Slim K, Chauvin M, Mariani P, Faucheron JL, Fletcher D (2014) French guidelines for enhanced recovery after elective colorectal surgery. J Visc Surg 151(1):65–79

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Schwenk W, Demartines N, Roulin D, Francis N, McNaught C, Macfie J, Liberman AS, Soop M, Hill A, Kennedy RH, Lobo DN, Fearon K, Ljungqvist O, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society, for Perioperative Care, European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN), International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) (2013) Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colonic surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations. World J Surg 37(2):259–284

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bardram L, Funch-Jensen P, Jensen P, Kehlet H, Crawford ME (1995) Recovery after laparoscopic colonic surgery with epidural analgesia, and early oral nutrition and mobilisation. Lancet 345(8952):763–764

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Dejong CHC, Fearon KCH, Ljungqvist O, Lobo DN (2010) The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing major elective open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr 29(4):434–440

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Zhuang C-L, Ye X-Z, Zhang X-D, Chen B-C, Yu Z (2013) Enhanced recovery after surgery programs versus traditional care for colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Dis Colon Rectum 56(5):667–678

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Spanjersberg WR, Reurings J, Keus F, van Laarhoven CJ. Fast track surgery versus conventional recovery strategies for colorectal surgery. Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group, editor. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; [cited 2018 Apr 30]; Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007635.pub2

  8. Lemanu DP, Singh PP, Stowers MDJ, Hill AG (2014) A systematic review to assess cost effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery programmes in colorectal surgery. Color Dis 16(5):338–346

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Greco M, Capretti G, Beretta L, Gemma M, Pecorelli N, Braga M (2014) Enhanced recovery program in colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Surg 38(6):1531–1541

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Maessen J, Dejong CHC, Hausel J, Nygren J, Lassen K, Andersen J, Kessels AGH, Revhaug A, Kehlet H, Ljungqvist O, Fearon KCH, von Meyenfeldt MF (2007) A protocol is not enough to implement an enhanced recovery programme for colorectal resection. Br J Surg 94(2):224–231

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gustafsson UO (2011) Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Arch Surg 146(5):571–577

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, Wu AW, Wilson MH, P-AC A et al (1999) Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines?: a framework for improvement. JAMA 282(15):1458–1465

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Alawadi ZM, Leal I, Phatak UR, Flores-Gonzalez JR, Holihan JL, Karanjawala BE, Millas SG, Kao LS (2016) Facilitators and barriers of implementing enhanced recovery in colorectal surgery at a safety net hospital: a provider and patient perspective. Surgery 159(3):700–712

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Roulin D, Donadini A, Gander S, Griesser A-C, Blanc C, Hübner M, Schäfer M, Demartines N (2013) Cost-effectiveness of the implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol for colorectal surgery: cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery protocol for colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 100(8):1108–1114

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lee L, Mata J, Ghitulescu GA, Boutros M, Charlebois P, Stein B, Liberman AS, Fried GM, Morin N, Carli F, Latimer E, Feldman LS (2015) Cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery versus conventional perioperative management for colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 262(6):1026–1033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Platt JJ, Ramanathan ML, Crosbie RA, Anderson JH, McKee RF, Horgan PG et al (2012) C-reactive protein as a predictor of postoperative infective complications after curative resection in patients with colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 19(13):4168–4177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Slim K (2016) The benefits of enhanced recovery after surgery. J Visc Surg 153(6):S41–S44

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pędziwiatr M, Kisialeuski M, Wierdak M, Stanek M, Natkaniec M, Matłok M, Major P, Małczak P, Budzyński A (2015) Early implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) protocol – compliance improves outcomes: a prospective cohort study. Int J Surg 21:75–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee L, Li C, Landry T, Latimer E, Carli F, Fried GM, Feldman LS (2014) A systematic review of economic evaluations of enhanced recovery pathways for colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 259(4):670–676

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ljungqvist O, Scott M, Fearon KC (2017) Enhanced recovery after surgery: a review. JAMA Surg 152(3):292–298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tiessen J, Kambara H, Sakai T, Kato K, Yamauchi K, McMillan C (2013) What causes international variations in length of stay: a comparative analysis for two inpatient conditions in Japanese and Canadian hospitals. Health Serv Manag Res 26(2–3):86–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmacy, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France

    Amel Benbouzid & Sandra Camps

  2. Department of Digestive, Oncologic and Metabolic Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Université Paris Descartes, 42 boulevard Jourdan, 75014, Paris, France

    Amel Benbouzid, Nicolas Tabchouri, Christine Denet, Jean-Marc Ferraz, Anais Laforest, Brice Gayet, Candice Tubbax, Ariane d’Avout d’Auerstaedt & David Fuks

  3. Health Law Institute, INSERM UMR S1145, Paris Descartes University, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France

    Pascal Paubel

  4. Department of Anesthesiology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France

    Anne-Elisabeth Bossard

  5. Department of Radiology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France

    Anthony Sarran

  6. Department of Medical information, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France

    Isabelle Aminot

Authors
  1. Amel Benbouzid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicolas Tabchouri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christine Denet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jean-Marc Ferraz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anais Laforest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Brice Gayet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Candice Tubbax
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Pascal Paubel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Ariane d’Avout d’Auerstaedt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Anne-Elisabeth Bossard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Anthony Sarran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Isabelle Aminot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Sandra Camps
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. David Fuks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Fuks.

Ethics declarations

This study was approved by the local institutional review board.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Benbouzid, A., Tabchouri, N., Denet, C. et al. Enhanced recovery protocols in colonic surgery: retrospective cohort analysis of economic impact from an institutional point of view. Int J Colorectal Dis 34, 301–307 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-018-3201-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-018-3201-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation