Article

A clinical and economic evaluation of fast-track recovery after cardiac surgery.

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Heart Surgery Forum (Impact Factor: 0.63). 12/2011; 14(6):E330-4. DOI: 10.1532/HSF98.20111029
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In the last 5 decades, the care of cardiac surgical patients has improved with the aid of strategies aimed at facilitating patient recovery. One of the innovations in this context is "fast-tracking" or "rapid recovery." This process refers to all interventions that aim to shorten a patient's stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) through accelerating the patient's transfer to a step-down or telemetry unit and to the general ward.
Patients were allocated to 2 groups. The fast-track group (n = 84) went through an independent theatre recovery unit (TRU). The patients were then transferred on the same day to an intermediate care unit and transferred on the following day to the ward. The intensive care group (52 patients) went to the ICU for at least 1 day, after which they were transferred to the ward.
The fast-track pathway significantly reduced the length of stay (LOS) in an intensive care facility (P < .001). The duration of intubation was reduced from a median of 4.08 hours (range, 1.17-13.17 hours) in the intensive care group to 2.75 hours (range, 0.25-18.57 hours) in the fast-track group (P < .001). However, the median values for total hospital LOS, incidences of complications, reintubation, and readmission were similar for the 2 groups. The incidence of failure in the fast-track group was 10%. The mean (SD) cost of the perioperative care was £4182 ± £2284 ($6683 ± 3650) for the fast-track patients, compared with £4553 ± £1355 ($7277 ± $2165) for the intensive care group.
Fast-track recovery after cardiac surgery decreases the intensive care LOS and the total duration of intubation. It is a cost-effective strategy compared with conventional recovery protocols; however, it does not reduce the total hospital LOS or the incidence of complications.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
198 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Evaluation of health care outcomes has become increasingly important as we strive to improve quality and efficiency while controlling cost. Many groups feel that analysis of large datasets will be useful in optimizing resource utilization; however, the ideal blend of clinical and administrative data points has not been developed. Hospitals and health care systems have several tools to measure cost and resource utilization, but the data are often housed in disparate systems that are not integrated and do not permit multisystem analysis. Systems Outcomes and Clinical Resources AdministraTive Efficiency Software (SOCRATES) is a novel data merging, warehousing, analysis, and reporting technology, which brings together disparate hospital administrative systems generating automated or customizable risk-adjusted reports. Used in combination with standardized enhanced care pathways, SOCRATES offers a mechanism to improve the quality and efficiency of care, with the ability to measure real-time changes in outcomes.
    Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery 03/2013; 26(1):56-62.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess the evidence on the impact of enhanced recovery programmes for patients undergoing elective surgery in acute hospital settings in the UK.
    BMJ Open 01/2014; 4(7):e005015. · 2.06 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Acuity Adaptable Patient Care (AAC) unit system allows all beds within a nursing unit to negate the need for transfer with changes in patient status. The unit is specialty specific to all levels of patient care. This system was implemented in March 2006 for cardiothoracic surgery at our institution. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the AAC system on the outcomes after adult cardiac surgery. We retrospectively reviewed 2930 consecutive patients who underwent major adult cardiac procedures between January 2003 and December 2010. The cohorts were divided into the pre-AAC group (January 2003 to February 2006, n = 1029) and the AAC group (March 2006 to December 2010, n = 1901). Patient demographics and postoperative outcomes were assessed. The proportion of coronary artery bypass grafting was significantly lower (pre-AAC vs AAC: 43 vs 35%, P < 0.01), while those of aortic procedure (4 vs 11%, P < 0.01) and mechanical assist device insertion (3 vs 5%, P = 0.02) were higher in the AAC group. After the implementation of the AAC system, the incidence of all complications defined by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) database (49 vs 34%, P < 0.01), the median length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (49 [interquartile range (IQR), 27-99] vs 26 [19-45] h, P < 0.01), that of hospital stay (6 [4-10] vs 5 [4-7] days, P < 0.01) and the readmission rate of ICU (5 vs 2% P < 0.01) were significantly decreased. Significant reductions in hospital mortality and the rate of hospital readmission <30 days were not observed. The implementation of the AAC system has improved the outcomes after major cardiac procedures. The incidence of postoperative complications and length of stay have all decreased significantly without increasing readmission rate. AAC creates a system of fluid care with specialty-trained nursing and other ancillary support that expedites discharge and improves overall patient outcomes.
    European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery 01/2014; · 2.40 Impact Factor