There has been an increase in the incidence of acute pancreatitis reported worldwide. Despite improvements in access to care, imaging and interventional techniques, acute pancreatitis continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite the availability of clinical practice guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis, recent studies auditing the clinical management of the condition have shown important areas of noncompliance with evidence-based recommendations. This underscores the importance of creating understandable and implementable recommendations for the diagnosis and management of acute pancreatitis. The purpose of the present guideline is to provide evidence-based recommendations for the management of both mild and severe acute pancreatitis as well as the management of complications of acute pancreatitis and of gall stone-induced pancreatitis.Une hausse de l'incidence de pancréatite aiguë a été constatée à l'échelle mondiale. Malgré l'amélioration de l'accès aux soins et aux techniques d'imagerie et d'intervention, la pancréatite aiguë est toujours associée à une morbidité et une mortalité importantes. Bien qu'il existe des guides de pratique clinique pour la prise en charge de la pancréatite aiguë, des études récentes sur la vérification de la prise en charge clinique de cette affection révèlent des lacunes importantes dans la conformité aux recommandations fondées sur des données probantes. Ces résultats mettent en relief l'importance de formuler des recommandations compréhensibles et applicables pour le diagnostic et la prise en charge de la pancréatite aiguë. La présente ligne directrice vise à fournir des recommandations fondées sur des données probantes pour la prise en charge de la pancréatite aiguë, qu'elle soit bénigne ou grave, ainsi que de ses complications et de celles de la pancréatite causée par un calcul biliaire.A cute pancreatitis can range from a mild, self-limiting disease that requires no more than supportive measures to severe disease with lifethreatening complications. The most common causes of acute pan creatitis are gallstones and binge alcohol consumption.1 There has been an increase in the incidence of acute pancreatitis reported worldwide. Despite improvements in access to care, imaging and interventional techniques, acute pancreatitis continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality.A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis revealed 14 guidelines published between 2004 and 2008 alone.2 Although these guidelines have significant overlap in their recommendations for diagnosing and managing acute pancreatitis, there is disagreement in some aspects of both the timing and types of interventions that should be used for both mild and severe acute pancreatitis. The availability of new imaging modalities and noninvasive therapies has also changed clinical practice. Finally, despite the availability of guidelines, recent studies auditing clinical management of acute pancreatitis have sh...

Multidisciplinary perioperative staff supported the implementation of an ERAS program at the University of Toronto-affiliated hospitals. However, major barriers were identified, including the need for patient education, increased communication and collaboration, and better evidence for ERAS interventions. Identifying these barriers and enablers is the first step toward successfully implementing an ERAS program.

BackgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal evidence-based approach to patient care that has become the standard in elective colorectal surgery. Implemented globally, ERAS programmes represent a considerable change in practice for many surgical care providers. Our current understanding of specific implementation and sustainability challenges is limited. In January 2013, we began a 2-year ERAS implementation for elective colorectal surgery in 15 academic hospitals in Ontario. The purpose of this study was to understand the process enablers and barriers that influenced the success of ERAS implementation in these centres with a view towards supporting sustainable change.MethodsA qualitative process evaluation was conducted from June to September 2014. Semi-structured interviews with implementation champions were completed, and an iterative inductive thematic analysis was conducted. Following a data-driven analysis, the Normalization Process Theory (NPT) was used as an analytic framework to understand the impact of various implementation processes. The NPT constructs were used as sensitizing concepts, reviewed against existing data categories for alignment and fit.ResultsFifty-eight participants were included: 15 surgeons, 14 anaesthesiologists, 15 nurses, and 14 project coordinators. A number of process-related implementation enablers were identified: champions’ belief in the value of the programme, the fit and cohesion of champions and their teams locally and provincially, a bottom-up approach to stakeholder engagement targeting organizational relationship-building, receptivity and support of division leaders, and the normalization of ERAS as everyday practice. Technical enablers identified included effective integration with existing clinical systems and using audit and feedback to report to hospital stakeholders. There was an overall optimism that ERAS implementation would be sustained, accompanied by concern about long-term organizational support.ConclusionsSuccessful ERAS implementation is achieved by a complex series of cognitive and social processes which previously have not been well described. Using the Normalization Process Theory as a framework, this analysis demonstrates the importance of champion coherence, external and internal relationship building, and the strategic management of a project’s organization-level visibility as important to ERAS uptake and sustainability.

On the basis of short-term findings, our results suggest that a tailored implementation strategy based on the KTA cycle can be used to successfully implement an ERAS program at multiple sites.

In hospitals with variable uptake of ERAS strategies, preoperative counseling, intraoperative fluid restriction, use of a laparoscopic approach, immediate initiation of clear fluids after surgery, and early discontinuation of the Foley catheter are all independently associated with shortened length of stay.

Postoperative compliance is the most difficult to achieve but is most strongly associated with optimal recovery. Although our data support that ERAS has more effect in patients undergoing open surgery, it also showed a significant impact on patients treated with a laparoscopic approach.

This Consensus Statement provides recommendations on the prescription of pain medication at discharge from hospital for opioid-naïve adult patients who undergo elective surgery. It encourages health care providers (surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses/nurse practitioners, pain teams, pharmacists, allied health professionals, and trainees) to (1) use nonopioid therapies and reduce the prescription of opioids so that fewer opioid pills are available for diversion and (2) educate patients and their families/caregivers about pain management options after surgery to optimize quality of care for postoperative pain. These recommendations apply to opioid-naïve adult patients who undergo elective surgery. This consensus statement is intended for use by health care providers involved in the management and care of surgical patients. A modified Delphi process was used to reach consensus on the recommendations. First, the authors conducted a scoping review of the literature to determine current best practices and existing guidelines. From the available literature and expertise of the authors, a draft list of recommendations was created. Second, the authors asked key stakeholders to review and provide feedback on several drafts of the document and attend an in-person consensus meeting. The modified Delphi stakeholder group included surgeons, anesthesiologists, residents, fellows, nurses, pharmacists, and patients. After multiple iterations, the document was deemed complete. The recommendations are not graded because they are mostly based on consensus rather than evidence. RÉSUMÉ Cette déclaration de consensus fait des recommandations pour la prescription d'analgésiques à la sortie de l'hôpital pour les patients adultes n'ayant jamais pris d'opiacés et qui subissent une intervention chirurgicale non urgente. Elle encourage les prestataires de soins de santé (chirurgiens, anesthésiologistes, infirmières et infirmiers, infirmières et infirmiers praticiens, équipes antidouleur, pharmaciens, professionnels de la santé et stagiaires) à (1) utiliser des traitements non opiacés et à réduire la prescription d'opiacés afin de réduire le nombre de pilules opiacées pouvant être détournées; et (2) à éduquer les patients, ainsi que leurs familles et soignants, sur les options de prise en charge de la douleur après l'opération afin d'optimiser la qualité des soins pour la douleur postopératoire. Ces recommandations s'appliquent aux patients adultes n'ayant jamais pris d'opioïdes et qui subissent une intervention chirurgicale non urgente. Cette déclaration de consensus est destinée à être utilisée par les prestataires de soins de santé impliqués dans la prise en charge des patients opérés et les soins qui leur sont apportés. Un processus Delphi modifié a été utilisé pour parvenir à un consensus sur les recommandations. Tout d'abord, les auteurs ont procédé à une de la portée de la littérature afin de déterminer les pratiques exemplaires actuelles et les lignes directrices existantes. À partir de la littérature disponible et de l'expertise des ...

Following colorectal surgery using an ERAS pathway, shortened length of stay is not associated with an increased return to the ER or hospital readmission. The majority of return visits to the hospital are ER visits not requiring readmission and the predominant reason for return are surgical site infections and wound complications.