Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 3, 2026
Laparoscopic Anatomic S7+S8d Resection Preserving Inferior Right Hepatic Vein and S6 with Right Hepatic Vein Transection
Published on: December 30, 2025
Systematic review of outcomes used to evaluate enhanced recovery after surgery
A Neville1, L Lee, I Antonescu
1Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery, McGill University Health Centre, and Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Background:
Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) aim to improve patient recovery. However, validated outcome measures to evaluate this complex process are lacking. The objective of this review was to identify how recovery is measured in ERP studies and to provide recommendations for the design of future studies.
Methods:
A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases was conducted. Prospective studies evaluating ERPs compared with traditional care in abdominal surgery published between 2000 and 2013 were included. All reported outcomes were classified into categories: biological and physiological variables, symptom status, functional status, general health perceptions and quality of life (QoL). The phase of recovery measured was defined as baseline, intermediate (in hospital) and late (following discharge).
Results:
A total of 38 studies were included based on the systematic review criteria. Biological or physiological variables other than postoperative complications were reported in 30 studies, and included return of gastrointestinal function (25 studies), pulmonary function (5) and physical strength (3). Patient-reported symptoms, including pain (16 studies) and fatigue (9), were reported less commonly. Reporting of functional status outcomes, including mobilization (16 studies) and ability to perform activities of daily living (4), was similarly uncommon. Health aspects of QoL were reported in only seven studies. Length of follow-up was generally short, with 24 studies reporting outcomes within 30 days or less. All studies documented in-hospital outcomes (intermediate phase), but only 17 reported postdischarge outcomes (late phase) other than complications or readmission.
Conclusion:
Patient-reported outcomes, particularly postdischarge functional status, were not commonly reported. Future studies of the effectiveness of ERPs should include validated, patient-reported outcomes to estimate better their impact on recovery, particularly after discharge from hospital.
Related Concept Videos
01:11Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
01:19Restorative Care
01:29Appendicitis-II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Diagnosing Appendicitis
It requires a multifaceted approach, starting with a detailed physical examination to pinpoint the location and nature of the pain and identify any associated symptoms. Laboratory tests play a crucial role. A complete Blood Count (CBC) typically reveals leukocytosis (an increased number of...
01:26Endoscopic Procedures IV: Sigmoidoscopy and Laproscopy
Sigmoidoscopy
Sigmoidoscopy is a diagnostic procedure that uses a flexible sigmoidoscope equipped with a light source and camera to examine the rectum and sigmoid colon. The procedure involves inserting the tube through the anus...