{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["45(4)"],"submitter":["Pache B"],"funding":["Université de Lausanne"],"pubmed_abstract":["<h4>Background</h4>Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have considerably improved postoperative outcomes and are in use for various types of surgery. The prospective audit system (EIAS) could be a powerful tool for large-scale outcome research but its database has not been validated yet.<h4>Methods</h4>Swiss ERAS centers were invited to contribute to the validation of the Swiss chapter for colorectal surgery. A monitoring team performed on-site visits by the use of a standardized checklist. Validation criteria were (I) coverage (No. of operated patients within ERAS protocol; target threshold for validation: ≥ 80%), (II) missing data (8 predefined variables; target ≤ 10%), and (III) accuracy (2 predefined variables, target ≥ 80%). These criteria were assessed by comparing EIAS entries with the medical charts of a random sample of patients per center (range 15-20).<h4>Results</h4>Out of 18 Swiss ERAS centers, 15 agreed to have onsite monitoring but 13 granted access to the final dataset. ERAS coverage was available in only 7 centers and varied between 76 and 100%. Overall missing data rate was 5.7% and concerned mainly the variables \"urinary catheter removal\" (16.4%) and \"mobilization on day 1\" (16%). Accuracy for the length of hospital stay and complications was overall 84.6%. Overall, 5 over 13 centers failed in the validation process for one or several criteria.<h4>Conclusion</h4>EIAS was validated in most Swiss ERAS centers. Potential patient selection and missing data remain sources of bias in non-validated centers. Therefore, simplified validation of other centers appears to be mandatory before large-scale use of the EIAS dataset."],"journal":["World journal of surgery"],"pagination":["940-945"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC7921022"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"pubmed_title":["Swiss Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Database."],"pmcid":["PMC7921022"],"pubmed_authors":["Addor V","Hubner M","Demartines N","Martin D","Pache B"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"Swiss Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Database.","description":"<h4>Background</h4>Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have considerably improved postoperative outcomes and are in use for various types of surgery. The prospective audit system (EIAS) could be a powerful tool for large-scale outcome research but its database has not been validated yet.<h4>Methods</h4>Swiss ERAS centers were invited to contribute to the validation of the Swiss chapter for colorectal surgery. A monitoring team performed on-site visits by the use of a standardized checklist. Validation criteria were (I) coverage (No. of operated patients within ERAS protocol; target threshold for validation: ≥ 80%), (II) missing data (8 predefined variables; target ≤ 10%), and (III) accuracy (2 predefined variables, target ≥ 80%). These criteria were assessed by comparing EIAS entries with the medical charts of a random sample of patients per center (range 15-20).<h4>Results</h4>Out of 18 Swiss ERAS centers, 15 agreed to have onsite monitoring but 13 granted access to the final dataset. ERAS coverage was available in only 7 centers and varied between 76 and 100%. Overall missing data rate was 5.7% and concerned mainly the variables \"urinary catheter removal\" (16.4%) and \"mobilization on day 1\" (16%). Accuracy for the length of hospital stay and complications was overall 84.6%. Overall, 5 over 13 centers failed in the validation process for one or several criteria.<h4>Conclusion</h4>EIAS was validated in most Swiss ERAS centers. Potential patient selection and missing data remain sources of bias in non-validated centers. Therefore, simplified validation of other centers appears to be mandatory before large-scale use of the EIAS dataset.","dates":{"release":"2021-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2021 Apr","modification":"2025-04-21T16:58:23.714Z","creation":"2025-04-21T16:58:23.714Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC7921022","cross_references":{"pubmed":["33486583"],"doi":["10.1007/s00268-020-05926-z"]}}