ABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate whether Enhanced Recovery After Cesarean (ERAC) pathways reduces inpatient and outpatient opioid use, pain scores and improves the indicators of postoperative recovery.
Study design This is a prospective cohort study of all patients older than 18 undergoing an uncomplicated cesarean delivery (CD) at an academic medical center. We excluded complicated CD, patients with chronic pain disorders, chronic opioid use, acute postpartum depression, or mothers whose neonate demised before their discharge. Lastly, we excluded non-English and non-Spanish speaking patients. Our study compared the outcomes in patients before (pre-ERAC) and after (post-ERAC) implementation of an ERAC pathways. Primary outcomes were inpatient morphine milligram equivalent (MME) use and the patient’s delta pain scores. Secondary outcomes were outpatient MME prescriptions as well as indicators of postoperative recovery.
Results Of 308 patients undergoing CD from October 2019 to September 2020, 196 were enrolled in the pre-ERAC cohort and 112 in the post-ERAC cohort. Patients in the post-ERAC cohort were less likely to require opioids in the postoperative period compared to the pre-ERAC cohort (35.7% vs. 18.4%, p<0.001). In addition, there was a significant reduction in the MME per stay in this cohort [16.8 MME (11.2-33.9) vs. 30 MME (20-49), p<0.001]. In the post-ERAC cohort, there was also a reduction in the number of patients who required prescribed opioids at the time of discharge (86.6 vs. 98%, p<0.001) as well as in the amount of MMEs prescribed [150 MME (112-150) vs. 150 MME (150-225), p<0.001; different shape of distribution]. Patients in the post-ERAC cohort had lower delta pain scores [2.2 (1.3-3.7) vs. 3.3 (2.3-4.7), p<0.001].
Conclusion Our study has illustrated that our ERAC pathways reduced inpatient and outpatient opioid use as well as patient-reported pain scores while improving indicators of postoperative recovery.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Institutional Review Board at university of Maryland, Baltimore, approved the study under the protocol HP-00088872
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
