No abstract

Purpose Research in psychology or management science has shown that shared leadership (SL) enhances information sharing, fosters participation and empowers team members within the decision-making processes, ultimately improving the quality of performance outcomes. Little has been done and, thus, less is known of the value and use of SL in acute healthcare teams. The purpose of this study is to (1) explore, identify and critically assess patterns and behaviour of SL in acute healthcare teams; and (2) evaluate to what extent SL may benefit and accomplish safer care in acute patient treatment and healthcare delivery. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a review that followed the PRISMA-P reporting guidelines. A variety of sources were searched in April 2018 for studies containing primary research that focused on SL in acute healthcare teams. The outcome of interest was a well-specified assessment of SL, and an evaluation of the extent SL may enhance team performance, lead to safer patient care and healthcare delivery in acute healthcare teams. Findings After the study selection process, 11 out of 1,383 studies were included in the review. Studies used a qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods approach. Emerging themes based on behavioural observations that contributed to SL were: shared mental model; social support and situational awareness; and psychological safety. High-performing teams showed more SL behaviour, teams with less seniority displayed more traditional leadership styles and SL was associated with increased team satisfaction. Research limitations/implications Evidence to date suggests that SL may be of benefit to improve performance outcomes in acute healthcare team settings. However, the discrepancy of SL assessments within existing studies and their small sample sizes highlights the need for a large, good quality randomized controlled trial to validate this indication. Originality/value Although studies have acknowledged the relevance of SL in healthcare service and delivery, a systematic, evidence-based and robust evaluation of behavioural patterns and the benefits of SL in this field is still missing.

BACKGROUND: Discharge on postoperative day 3 after laparoscopic colorectal resections is now common, and same-day discharge has been proposed recently as an option. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the safety of same-day and next-day discharge after laparoscopic colorectal surgery and to delineate which characteristics may make a patient eligible for this pathway. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Targeted Colectomy Participant User File was used. PATIENTS: Patients underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal resection and were discharged without complications on or before postoperative day 5 (early discharge: postoperative day 0 or 1, intermediate: postoperative day 2, standard: postoperative day 3 to 5). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Early readmission (on or before postoperative day 7), anastomotic leak, ileus, and overall readmission were measured. RESULTS: Of 36,526 patients total, 906 (2.5%) were discharged on postoperative day 0 or 1. Patients discharged on postoperative day 0/1 tended to have shorter-duration operations, a diagnostic indication more commonly of benign neoplasm, and underwent less low pelvic anastomoses. The readmission rate within 7 days was only 2%. Overall rates of anastomotic leak (0.6% early, 1.0% intermediate, 1.2% standard), ileus (1.9% early, 1.5% intermediate, 2.1% standard), and readmission (early 4.8%, intermediate 5.1%, standard 5.8%) were equivalent to decreased in patients discharged early versus those discharged in the intermediate or standard discharge groups. On multivariable analysis, dismissal day remained a noncontributory-to-protective factor against anastomotic leak, ileus, and readmission. LIMITATIONS: Specific follow-up pathways used were unknown, and selection bias exists in deciding what day patients can be discharged. CONCLUSIONS: Discharge on the same day or next day after surgery was not associated with increased risk compared with discharge on postoperative day 3 to 5, and it did not result in a high rate of early readmissions. Increased use of expedited discharge pathways would reduce hospital costs and resource use. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B331. ¿Es razonable el alta el mismo día o al día siguiente, después de la colectomía laparoscópica en pacientes seleccionados ANTECEDENTES: Es común el alta hospitalaria en el 3er día postoperatorio, después de resecciones colorrectales laparoscópicas. Recientemente se ha propuesto como una opción, el alta el mismo día. OBJETIVO: Determinar la seguridad de alta el mismo día o al día siguiente después de la cirugía colorrectal laparoscópica, y delinear qué características pueden hacer que un paciente sea elegible para esta vía. DISEÑO: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo. AJUSTES: American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Targeted Colectomy Participant User File. PACIENTES: Se sometieron a resección colorrectal laparoscópica electiva, y se dieron de alta sin complicaciones durante el 5° día postoperatorio o antes (alta temprana: día 0 o 1 postoperatorio; intermedia: día 2 postoperatorio; estándar: día 3-5 postoperatorio). PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Reingreso temprano (en o antes del día 7 postoperatorio), fuga anastomótica, íleo y reingreso general. RESULTADOS: De 36,526 pacientes en total, 906 (2.5%) fueron dados de alta en el día 0 o 1 postoperatorio. Los pacientes dados de alta en el día 0/1 postoperatorio, tendieron a presentar operaciones de menor duración, indicación diagnóstica más frecuente de neoplasia benigna, y sometidos a menos anastomosis de pelvis baja. La tasa de readmisión dentro de los siete días, fue del 2%. Las tasas generales de fuga anastomótica (0.6% temprana, 1.0% intermedia, 1.2% estándar), íleo (1.9% temprana, 1.5% intermedia, 2.1% estándar) y reingreso (temprana 4.8%, intermedia 5.1%, estándar 5.8%) fueron equivalentes a la disminución en pacientes dados de alta temprana, versus aquellos dados de alta en los grupos intermedia o estándar. En el análisis multivariable, el día de alta no contribuyó al factor protector contra la fuga anastomótica, el íleo y el reingreso. LIMITACIONES: Se desconocen las vías de seguimiento específicas utilizadas y existe un sesgo de selección al decidir en qué día se puede dar de alta a los pacientes. CONCLUSIONES: El alta el mismo día o al día siguiente después de la cirugía, no se asoció con un mayor riesgo, en comparación con el alta en el postoperatorio en los días 3-5, y no dio lugar a una alta tasa de reingresos tempranos. Mayor utilización de las vías de alta acelerada, reducirían costos hospitalarios y utilización de recursos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B331. (Traducción—Dr Fidel Ruiz Healy)

Anastomotic leaks are a feared complication of colorectal resections and novel techniques that have the potential to decrease them are still sought. This study aimed to compare the anastomotic leak rates in patients undergoing compression anastomoses versus hand-sewn or stapled anastomoses. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes of compression versus conventional (hand-sewn and stapled) colorectal anastomosis were collected from MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The quality of the RCTs and the potential risk of bias were assessed. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated for categorical outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous data. Ten RCTs were included, comprising 1969 patients (752 sutured, 225 stapled, and 992 compression anastomoses). Most used the biofragmentable anastomotic ring. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of anastomotic leak rates (OR 0.80, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.47, 1.37; p = 0.42), stricture (OR 0.54: 95 % CI 0.18, 1.64; p = 0.28) or mortality (OR 0.70; 95 % CI 0.39, 1.26; p = 0.24). Compression anastomosis was associated with an earlier return of bowel function: 1.02 (95 % CI 1.37, 0.66) days earlier (p < 0.001) and a shorter postoperative stay; 1.13 (95 % CI 1.52, 0.74) days shorter (p < 0.001), but significant heterogeneity among studies was observed. There was an increased risk of postoperative bowel obstruction in the compression group (OR 1.87; 95 % CI 1.07, 3.26; p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in wound-related and general complications, or length of surgery. Compression devices do not appear to provide an advantage over conventional techniques in fashioning colorectal anastomoses and are associated with an increased risk of bowel obstruction.