Efficacy of Electronic Reminders in Increasing the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol Use During Major Breast Surgery: Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are patient-centered, evidence-based guidelines for peri-, intra-, and postoperative management of surgical candidates that aim to decrease operative complications and facilitate recovery after surgery. Anesthesia providers can use these protocols to guide decision-making and standardize aspects of their anesthetic plan in the operating room. OBJECTIVE: Research across multiple disciplines has demonstrated that clinical decision support systems have the potential to improve protocol adherence by reminding providers about departmental policies and protocols via notifications. There remains a gap in the literature about whether clinical decision support systems can improve patient outcomes by improving anesthesia providers' adherence to protocols. Our hypothesis is that the implementation of an electronic notification system to anesthesia providers the day prior to scheduled breast surgeries will increase the use of the already existing but underused ERAS protocols. METHODS: This was a single-center prospective cohort study conducted between October 2017 and August 2018 at an urban academic medical center. After obtaining approval from the institutional review board, anesthesia providers assigned to major breast surgery cases were identified. Patient data were collected pre- and postimplementation of an electronic notification system that sent the anesthesia providers an email reminder of the ERAS breast protocol the night before scheduled surgeries. Each patient's record was then reviewed to assess the frequency of adherence to the various ERAS protocol elements. RESULTS: Implementation of an electronic notification significantly improved overall protocol adherence and several preoperative markers of ERAS protocol adherence. Protocol adherence increased from 16% (n=14) to 44% (n=44; P<.001), preoperative administration of oral gabapentin (600 mg) increased from 13% (n=11) to 43% (n=43; P<.001), and oral celebrex (400 mg) use increased from 16% (n=14) to 35% (n=35; P=.006). There were no statistically significant differences in the use of scopolamine transdermal patch (P=.05), ketamine (P=.35), and oral acetaminophen (P=.31) between the groups. Secondary outcomes such as intraoperative and postoperative morphine equivalent administered, postanesthesia care unit length of stay, postoperative pain scores, and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting did not show statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: This study examines whether sending automated notifications to anesthesia providers increases the use of ERAS protocols in a single academic medical center. Our analysis exhibited statistically significant increases in overall protocol adherence but failed to show significant differences in secondary outcome measures. Despite the lack of a statistically significant difference in secondary postoperative outcomes, our analysis contributes to the limited literature on the relationship between using push notifications and clinical decision support in guiding perioperative decision-making. A variety of techniques can be implemented, including technological solutions such as automated notifications to providers, to improve awareness and adherence to ERAS protocols.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".