The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Implementation of a Fast-Track Perioperative Care Program: What Are the Difficulties?
Abstract
Background: To evaluate the feasibility of a fast-track (FT) program and it’s effect on postoperative recovery. Methods: All patients, scheduled for elective segmental colorectal resection were treated in a FT program (FT group). Data were compared to a control group operated for elective colorectal resections and treated in a traditional care program (TC group). Data from the FT group were collected prospectively, data from the TC group retrospectively. Outcome parameters included the number of successfully applied FT modalities, patient satisfaction, morbidity rate, re-operation rate, primary (PHS) and total hospital stay (THS), and readmission rate. Results: One-hundred and seven patients were included (55 FT group vs. 52 TC group). The groups were comparable for patient characteristics such as age and cr-POSSUM score (p = 0.22 and p = 0.40). An average of 7.4 of 13 predefined FT modalities were successfully achieved per patient. Patient satisfaction was comparable (p = 0.84). Seven versus 5 patients required a re-operation in the FT and TC groups, respectively (p = 0.52). Morbidity rate was comparable (n = 16 vs. 15, p = 0.83). Median PHS was 4.0 vs. 6.0 days and median THS was 4.0 vs. 6.5 days in the FT and TC groups (p < 0.01 and p < 0.03, respectively). Six vs. 3 patients were re-admitted in the FT and TC groups, respectively (p = 0.49). Conclusion: Implementation of all FT modalities was difficult since a rather low number of pre-defined FT modalities was effectively realized. Despite incomplete implementation, PHS and THS were shorter in the FT group without affecting patient satisfaction.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Gustafsson, U. O. (2011) · Archives of Surgery · doi:10.1001/archsurg.2010.309 · Cited by 936
Vlug, M. S., Wind, J., Hollmann, M. W., Ubbink, D. T., Cense, H. A., Engel, A. F., Gerhards, M. F., van Wagensveld, B. A., van der Zaag, E. S., van Geloven, A. A. W., et al. (2011) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e31821fd1ce · Cited by 757
Self-citationAdamina, M., Kehlet, H., Tomlinson, G. A., Senagore, A. J., & Delaney, C. P. (2011) · Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.surg.2010.11.003 · Cited by 555
Behrns, K. E. (2012) · Yearbook of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ysur.2011.11.001 · Cited by 426
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols: Time to change practice?
Melnyk, M., Casey, R. G., Black, P., & Koupparis, A. J. (2011) · Canadian Urological Association Journal · doi:10.5489/cuaj.11002 · Cited by 384
Metadata
- Authors
- Polle, S. W., Wind, J., Fuhring, J. W., Hofland, J., Gouma, D. J., & Bemelman, W. A.
- Venue
- Digestive Surgery
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 441-449
- ISSN
- 0253-4886 (ISSN-L)
- 1421-9883
- OpenAlex
- W2044738935
- Cited by
- 165
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Implementation of a Fast-Track Perioperative Care Program: What Are the Difficulties? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000108327
- The paper
- Polle, S. W., Wind, J., Fuhring, J. W., Hofland, J., Gouma, D. J., & Bemelman, W. A. (2007). Implementation of a Fast-Track Perioperative Care Program: What Are the Difficulties? Digestive Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1159/000108327
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.