Key result
Using a co-design framework with 40 stakeholders identified 16 implementation strategies for ERAS protocols, with reviewing clinical pathways and patient education ranked as top priorities.
Why the study?
Although Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay and postoperative complications, uptake remains variable across many healthcare settings.
A co-design approach involving diverse stakeholders identified consensus-driven strategies, such as reviewing clinical pathways and enhancing patient education, to improve the implementation of ERAS protocols.
Supports co-design for ERAS strategies; leaves open real-world impact on adherence and outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The clinical effectiveness of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols in reducing length of stay and postoperative complications is well established. Yet, the uptake of these protocols remains variable in many healthcare settings. METHODS: We used the Generative Co-Design Framework for Healthcare Innovation to design and deliver strategies to implement ERAS protocols at one Australian tertiary hospital. Co-design groups included surgeons, anaesthetists, perioperative and surgical nurses, and health consumers with previous surgery experience. Two workshops with co-designers were held over 4 months. Textual data derived through workshop artefacts and discussions were analysed inductively. Then, subcategories representing implementation strategies were deductively mapped to the level they primarily target, individual, team and organisation. Finally, using a consensus-building approach, the top two implementation strategies were ranked across each group. RESULTS: In total, 36 practitioners across perioperative, ward, surgery and anaesthetics and 4 consumers participated in the co-design sessions. Through the analysis, 16 implementation strategies were identified, and half of these were aimed at the organisational level. Strategies ranked in the top two commons across all groups of practitioners included reviewing clinical pathways and processes. Consumers believed receiving patient education about ERAS, including its risks and benefits, was essential. CONCLUSION: Our findings underscore the intricate nature of coordinating diverse stakeholders in co-design processes. Despite the challenges this may present, it provides valuable insights and promotes consensus-driven solutions, ultimately strengthening the implementation of ERAS initiatives. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Consumers were involved in the co-design process and were co-researchers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tobiano et al. (2025) studied Surgery (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) (n=40). Generative Co-Design Framework for Healthcare Innovation was evaluated on Identification and ranking of implementation strategies for ERAS protocols. Using a co-design framework with 40 stakeholders identified 16 implementation strategies for ERAS protocols, with reviewing clinical pathways and patient education ranked as top priorities.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: