ObjectivesExplore the experience of patients undergoing colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programme. Use these experiential data to inform the development of a framework to support ongoing, meaningful patient engagement in ERAS.DesignQualitative patient-led study using focus groups and narrative interviews. Data were analysed iteratively using a Participatory Grounded Theory approach.SettingFive tertiary care centres in Alberta, Canada, following the ERAS programme.ParticipantsTwenty-seven patients who had undergone colorectal surgery in the last 12 months were recruited through purposive sampling. Seven patients participated in a codesign focus group to set and prioritise the research direction. Narrative interviews were conducted with 20 patients.ResultsPatients perceived that an ERAS programme should not be limited to the perioperative period, but should encompass the journey from diagnosis to recovery. Practical recommendations to improve the patient experience across the surgical continuum, and enhance patient engagement within ERAS included: (1) fully explain every protocol, and the purpose of the protocol, both before surgery and while in-hospital, so that patients can become knowledgeable partners in their recovery; (2) extend ERAS guidelines to the presurgery phase, so that patients can be ready emotionally, psychologically and physically for surgery; (3) extend ERAS guidelines to the recovery period at home to avoid stressful situations for patients and families; (4) consider activating a programme where experienced patients can provide peer support; (5) one size does not fit all; personalised adaptations within the standardised pathway are required.Drawing upon these data, and through consultation with ERAS Alberta stakeholders, the ERAS team developed a matrix to guide sustained patient involvement and action throughout the surgical care continuum at three levels: individual, unit and ERAS system.ConclusionThis patient-led study generated new insights into the needs of ERAS patients and informed the development of a framework to improve patient experiences and outcomes.

The findings in our study have shown that ERAS colorectal guideline implementation within a healthcare system resulted in patient outcome improvements, similar to those obtained in smaller standalone implementations. There was a significant beneficial impact of ERAS on scarce health system resources.

BackgroundEnhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs have been shown to have a positive impact on outcome. The ERAS care system includes an evidence-based guideline, an implementation program, and an interactive audit system to support practice change. The purpose of this study is to describe the use of the Theoretic Domains Framework (TDF) in changing surgical care and application of the Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) model to analyze end-to-end implementation of ERAS in colorectal surgery across multiple sites within a single health system. The ultimate intent of this work is to allow for the development of a model for spread, scale, and sustainability of ERAS in Alberta Health Services (AHS).MethodsERAS for colorectal surgery was implemented at two sites and then spread to four additional sites. The ERAS Interactive Audit System (EIAS) was used to assess compliance with the guidelines, length of stay, readmissions, and complications. Data sources informing knowledge translation included surveys, focus groups, interviews, and other qualitative data sources such as minutes and status updates. The QUERI model and TDF were used to thematically analyze 189 documents with 2188 quotes meeting the inclusion criteria. Data sources were analyzed for barriers or enablers, organized into a framework that included individual to organization impact, and areas of focus for guideline implementation.ResultsCompliance with the evidence-based guidelines for ERAS in colorectal surgery at baseline was 40%. Post implementation compliance, consistent with adoption of best practice, improved to 65%. Barriers and enablers were categorized as clinical practice (22%), individual provider (26%), organization (19%), external environment (7%), and patients (25%). In the Alberta context, 26% of barriers and enablers to ERAS implementation occurred at the site and unit levels, with a provider focus 26% of the time, a patient focus 26% of the time, and a system focus 22% of the time.ConclusionsUsing the ERAS care system and applying the QUERI model and TDF allow for identification of strategies that can support diffusion and sustainment of innovation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery across multiple sites within a health care system.

Background As a result of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), there have been widespread changes in healthcare access. We conducted a retrospective population-based study in Alberta, Canada (population 4.4 million), where there have been approximately 1550 hospital admissions for COVID-19, to determine the impact of COVID-19 on hospital admissions and emergency department (ED visits), following initiation of a public health emergency act on March 15, 2020. Methods We used multivariable negative binomial regression models to compare daily numbers of medical/surgical hospital admissions via the ED between March 16-September 23, 2019 (pre COVID-19) and March 16-September 23, 2020 (post COVID-19 public health measures). We compared the most frequent diagnoses for hospital admissions pre/post COVID-19 public health measures. A similar analysis was completed for numbers of daily ED visits for any reason with a particular focus on ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC). Findings There was a significant reduction in both daily medical (incident rate ratio (IRR) 0.86, p<0.001) and surgical (IRR 0.82, p<0.001) admissions through the ED in Alberta post COVID-19 public health measures. There was a significant decline in daily ED visits (IRR 0.65, p<0.001) including ACSC (IRR 0.75, p<0.001). The most common medical/surgical diagnoses for hospital admissions did not vary substantially pre and post COVID-19 public health measures, though there was a significant reduction in admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and a significant increase in admissions for mental and behavioral disorders due to use of alcohol. Conclusions Despite a relatively low volume of COVID-19 hospital admissions in Alberta, there was an extensive impact on our healthcare system with fewer admissions to hospital and ED visits. This work generates hypotheses around causes for reduced hospital admissions and ED visits which warrant further investigation. As most publicly funded health systems struggle with health-system capacity routinely, understanding how these reductions can be safely sustained will be critical.

The emergence of a dialectic from polar opposite roles is difficult to locate in health or other institutions where power differentials exist but there are indications that this new role might become a template for other merged roles in patient-led medical teams.

Background The role of patient involvement in health research has evolved over the past decade. Despite efforts to engage patients as partners, the role is not well understood. We undertook this review to understand the engagement practices of patients who assume roles as partners in health research. Methods Using a recognized methodological approach, two academic databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE) and grey literature sources were searched. Findings were organized into one of the three higher levels of engagement, described by the Patient and Researcher Engagement framework developed by Manafo. We examined and quantified the supportive strategies used during involvement, used thematic analysis as described by Braun and Clarke and themed the purpose of engagement, and categorized the reported outcomes according to the CIHR Engagement Framework. Results Out of 6621 records, 119 sources were included in the review. Thematic analysis of the purpose of engagement revealed five themes: documenting and advancing PPI, relevance of research, co‐building, capacity building and impact on research. Improved research design was the most common reported outcome and the most common role for patient partners was as members of the research team, and the most commonly used strategy to support involvement was by meetings. Conclusion The evidence collected during this review advanced our understanding of the engagement of patients as research partners. As patient involvement becomes more mainstream, this knowledge will aid researchers and policy‐makers in the development of approaches and tools to support engagement. Patient/User Involvement Patients led and conducted the grey literature search, including the synthesis and interpretation of the findings.

Background: In February 2013, Alberta Health Services established an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) implementation program for adopting the ERAS Society colorectal guidelines into 6 sites (initial phase) that perform more than 75% of all colorectal surgeries in the province. We conducted an economic evaluation of this initiative to not only determine its cost-effectiveness, but also to inform strategy for the spread and scale of ERAS to other surgical protocols and sites. Methods:We assessed the impact of ERAS on patients' health services utilization (HSU; length of stay [LOS], readmissions, emergency department visits, general practitioner and specialist visits) within 30 days of discharge by comparing pre-and post-ERAS groups using multilevel negative binomial regressions. We estimated the net health care costs/savings and the return on investment (ROI) associated with those impacts for post-ERAS patients using a decision analytic modelling technique. Results:We included 331 pre-and 1295 post-ERAS patients in our analyses. ERAS was associated with a reduction in all HSU outcomes except visits to specialists. However, only the reduction in primary LOS was significant. The net health system savings were estimated at $2 290 000 (range $1 191 000-$3 391 000), or $1768 (range $920-$2619) per patient. The probability for the program to be cost-saving was 73%-83%. In terms of ROI, every $1 invested in ERAS would bring $3.8 (range $2.4-$5.1) in return. Conclusion:The initial phase of ERAS implementation for colorectal surgery in Alberta is cost-saving. The total savings has the potential to be more substantial when ERAS is spread for other surgical protocols and across additional sites.Contexte : En février 2013, les Services de santé de l'Alberta ont mis en place le programme ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery -récupération postchirurgicale améliorée) dans le but de faire adopter les lignes directrices en matière d'interventions colorectales de la ERAS Society à 6 établissements (première phase) où sont pratiquées plus de 75 % des interventions chirurgicales colorectales de la province. Nous avons réalisé une évaluation économique du programme, non seulement pour en mesurer la rentabilité, mais aussi pour élaborer une stratégie visant à étendre le programme ERAS à d'autres protocoles chirurgicaux et services de chirurgie.Méthodes : Nous avons mesuré les effets du programme ERAS sur l'utilisation des services de santé (durée de séjour, réadmissions, visites au service des urgences, visites d'un omnipraticien ou d'un spécialiste) dans les 30 jours suivant le congé en comparant les groupes pré-et post-ERAS à l'aide de régressions binomiales négatives multiniveaux. Nous avons évalué le coût net des soins de santé, les économies réalisées et le rendement sur investissement (RSI) associés aux mesures ci-dessus chez les patients post-ERAS à l'aide d'une technique de modélisation analytique décisionnelle.Résultats : Nos analyses ont porté sur 331 patients pré-ERAS et 1295 patients post-ERAS. Nous avons observé une...

ObjectiveTo elicit perspectives of family physicians and patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) on KOA, its treatment/management and the use of a mobile health application (app) to help patients self-manage their KOA.DesignA qualitative study using Cognitive Task Analysis for physician interviews and peer-to-peer semistructured interviews for patients according to the Patient and Community Engagement Research (PaCER) method.SettingPrimary care practices and patient researchers at an academic centre in Southern Alberta.ParticipantsIntentional sampling of family physicians (n=4; 75% women) and patients with KOA who had taken part in previous PaCER studies and had experienced knee pain on most days of the month at any time in the past (n=5; 60% women).ResultsPhysician and patient views about KOA were starkly contrasting. Patient participants expressed that KOA seriously impacted their lives and lifestyles, and they wanted their knee pain to be considered as important as other health problems. In contrast, physicians uniformly conceptualised KOA as a relatively minor health problem, although they still recognised it as a painful condition that often limits patients’ activities. Consequently, physicians did not regard KOA as a condition to be proactively and aggressively managed. The gap between physicians’ and patients’ conceptualisation of KOA and its treatment extended to the use of an app for self-management. While patients were supportive of the app, physicians were sceptical of its use and focused more on accountability and patient resources.ConclusionsThe clear discord between physicians’ mental models and patients’ lived experience and perceived needs around KOA emphasised a gap in understanding and communication about treatment and management of KOA. As such, this preliminary and formative research will inform a codesign approach to develop an app that will act as a communications tool between patients and physicians, enabling patient–physician discussions regarding modifiable self-management options based on a patient’s perspectives and needs.