Interdepartmental Spread of Innovations: A Multicentre Study of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Programme
Authors:
- Jeanny J. A. de GrootJGJeanny J. A. de Groot
- Bjorn WinkensBjorn Winkens
- Trudy van der WeijdenTWTrudy van der Weijden
- all the members of the study groupAGall the members of the study group
- R. L. M. BekkersRBR. L. M. Bekkers
- E. A. BossEBE. A. Boss
- E. B. L. van DorstEDE. B. L. van Dorst
- W. J. van DrielWDW. J. van Driel
Open Access
- 31 January 2018
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in World Journal of Surgery
- Vol. 42 (8) , 2348-2355
Abstract
Background: Spread of evidence‐based innovations beyond pioneering settings is essential to improve quality of care. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of a national project to implement ‘Enhanced Recovery After Surgery’ (ERAS) among colorectal teams on the spread of this innovation to gynaecological procedures.Methods: A retrospective observational multicentre study was performed of a consecutive sample of patients who underwent major elective gynaecological surgery in 2012–2013. Ten Dutch hospitals (294 patients) had participated in a colorectal breakthrough project implementing ERAS on a nationwide basis and were assigned to the intervention group. Thirteen hospitals (390 patients) that had not participated in this project acted as controls. Outcome measures were time to functional recovery and total length of postoperative hospital stay. Multilevel models adjusted for clustering and baseline demographics were used for analysis. The uptake of ten selected perioperative care elements was evaluated for each hospital.Results: The estimated mean difference (95% confidence interval) between the intervention and control hospitals was −0.3 (−0.9 to 0.3) days in the time to recovery and 0.2 (−0.8 to 1.3) days in the total length of hospital stay. The mean (± standard deviation) absolute rate of implemented perioperative care elements per hospital was 28.9 ± 14.9% in the control, versus 29.3 ± 11.1% in the intervention group (p = 0.934).Conclusion: Initial implementation effects seem to be restricted to the participating teams and do not automatically spread to other surgical teams in the same hospital.Keywords
Funding Information
- ZonMw (80-83700-98-133021)
- ZonMw (80‐83700‐98‐133021)
This publication has 41 references indexed in Scilit:
- A measurement instrument for spread of quality improvement in healthcareInternational Journal for Quality in Health Care, 2013
- Knowledge translation of research findingsImplementation Science, 2012
- Towards an organisation-wide process-oriented organisation of care: A literature reviewImplementation Science, 2011
- Length of Stay: An Inappropriate Readout of the Success of Enhanced Recovery ProgramsWorld Journal of Surgery, 2008
- THE LIMITS OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FOR UK PUBLIC SERVICES MODERNIZATION: THE CASE OF PATIENT SAFETY AND SERVICE QUALITYPublic Administration, 2007
- Randomised trial of drains versus no drains following radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection: a European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Gynaecological Cancer Group (EORTC-GCG) study in 234 patientsEuropean Journal of Cancer, 2007
- Innovation in SurgeryAnnals of Surgery, 2006
- Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and RecommendationsThe Milbank Quarterly, 2004
- A Framework for Collaborative ImprovementQuality Management in Health Care, 1998
- To Drain or Not To Drain: A Retrospective Study of Closed-Suction Drainage Following Radical Hysterectomy with Pelvic LymphadenectomyGynecologic Oncology, 1993