Compliance with enhanced recovery after surgery criteria and preoperative and postoperative counselling reduces length of hospital stay in colorectal surgery: results of a randomized controlled trial A systematic review of enhanced recovery protocols in colorectal surgery. Enhanced recovery in colorectal surgery: a multicentre study The Impact of Enhanced Recovery Protocol Compliance on Elective Colorectal Cancer Resection: Results From an International Registry. Randomized clinical trial on enhanced recovery versus standard care following open liver resection An Enhanced-Recovery Protocol Improves Outcome After Colorectal Resection Already During the First Year: A Single-Center Experience in 168 Consecutive Patients Enhanced Recovery Program following Colorectal Resection in the Elderly Patient Safety and efficacy of an “enhanced recovery after surgery” protocol for patients undergoing colon cancer surgery: a multi-institutional controlled study Prospective study of colorectal enhanced recovery after surgery in a community hospital. Implementing Fast-Track Protocol for Colorectal Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Enhanced Recoveryafter Colorectal Surgery. Results from Aprospective Observational Two-Centre Study Cost-effectiveness of Enhanced Recovery Versus Conventional Perioperative Management for Colorectal Surgery The influence of an Enhanced Recovery Programme on clinical outcomes, costs and quality of life after surgery for colorectal cancer Feasibility of enhanced recovery programme in various patient groups Enhanced recovery in major colorectal surgery: safety and efficacy in an unselected surgical population at a UK district general hospital. EnROL: A multicentre randomised trial of conventional versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme A mobile device application (app) to improve adherence to an enhanced recovery program for colorectal surgery: a randomized controlled trial
The aim of this r and omized clinical trial was to compare patients treated using a multimodal approach [ enhanced recovery after surgery ( ERAS ) ]  , with a special focus on counselling , to patients treated in a st and ard conventional care pathway , who underwent elective colorectal resection INTRODUCTION Colorectal surgery has been associated with a complication rate of 15 - 20 % and mean post-operative inpatient stays of 6 - 11 days . The principles of enhanced recovery after surgery ( ERAS ) are well established and have been developed to optimise peri-operative care and facilitate discharge . The purpose of this systematic review is to present an up date d review of peri-operative care in colorectal surgery from the available evidence and ERAS group recommendations . METHODS Systematic search es of the PubMed and Embase ™ data bases and the Cochrane library were conducted . A h and search of bibliographies of identified studies was conducted to identify any additional articles missed by the initial search strategy . RESULTS A total of 59 relevant studies were identified . These included six r and omised controlled trials and seven clinical controlled trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria . These studies showed reductions in duration of inpatient stays in the ERAS groups compared with more traditional care as well as reductions in morbidity and mortality rates . CONCLUSIONS Review ing the data reveals that ERAS protocol s have a role in reducing post-operative morbidity and result in an accelerated recovery following colorectal surgery . Similarly , both primary and overall hospital stays are reduced significantly . However , the available evidence suggests that ERAS protocol s do not reduce hospital readmissions or mortality . These findings help to confirm that ERAS protocol s should now be implemented as the st and ard approach for peri-operative care in colorectal surgery Background Major colorectal surgery usually requires a hospital stay of more than 12 days . Inadequate pain management , intestinal dysfunction and immobilisation are the main factors associated with delay in recovery . The present work assesses the short and medium term results achieved by an enhanced recovery program based on previously published protocol s. Methods This prospect i ve study , performed at 12 Spanish hospitals in 2008 and 2009 , involved 300 patients . All patients underwent elective colorectal resection for cancer following an enhanced recovery program .  The main elements of this program were : preoperative advice , no colon preparation , provision of carbohydrate-rich drinks one day prior and on the morning of surgery , goal directed fluid administration , body temperature control during surgery , avoiding drainages and nasogastric tubes , early mobilisation , and the taking of oral fluids in the early postoperative period . Perioperative morbidity and mortality data were collected and the length of hospital stay and protocol compliance recorded . Results The median age of the patients was 68 years . Fifty-two % of the patients were women . The distribution of patients by ASA class was : I 10 % , II 50 % and III 40 % . Sixty-four % of interventions were laparoscopic ; 15 % required conversion to laparotomy . The majority of patients underwent sigmoidectomy or right hemicolectomy .  The overall compliance to protocol was approximately 65 % , but varied widely in its different components . The median length of postoperative hospital stay was 6 days . Some 3 % of patients were readmitted to hospital after discharge ; some 7 % required repeat surgery during their initial hospitalisation or after readmission . The most common complications were surgical ( 24 % ) , followed by septic ( 11 % ) or other medical complications ( 10 % ) . Three patients ( 1 % ) died during follow-up . Some 31 % of patients suffered symptoms that delayed their discharge , the most common being vomiting or nausea ( 12 % ) , dyspnoea ( 7 % ) and fever ( 5 % ) . Conclusion The following of this enhanced recovery program posed no risk to patients in terms of morbidity , mortality and shortened the length of their hospital stay . Overall compliance to protocol was 65 % . The following of this program was of benefit to patients and reduces costs by shortening the length of hospital stay . The implantation of such programmes is therefore highly recommended BACKGROUND The ERAS ( enhanced recovery after surgery ) care has been shown in r and omized clinical trials to improve outcome after colorectal surgery compared to traditional care . The impact of different levels of compliance and specific elements , particularly out with a trial setting , is poorly understood . OBJECTIVE This study evaluated the individual impact of specific patient factors and perioperative enhanced recovery protocol compliance on postoperative outcome after elective primary colorectal cancer resection . METHODS The international , multicenter ERAS registry data , collected between November 2008 and March 2013 , was review ed . Patient demographics , disease characteristics , and perioperative ERAS protocol compliance were assessed . Linear regression was undertaken for primary admission duration and logistic regression for the development of any postoperative complication . FINDINGS A total of 1509 colonic and 843 rectal resections were undertaken in 13 centers from 6 countries .  Median length of stay for colorectal resections was 6 days , with readmissions in 216 ( 9.2 % ) , complications in 948 ( 40 % ) , and reoperation in 167 ( 7.1 % ) of 2352 patients . Laparoscopic surgery was associated with reduced complications [ odds ratio ( OR ) = 0.68 ; P < 0.001 ] and length of stay ( OR = 0.83 , P < 0.001 ) . Increasing ERAS compliance was correlated with fewer complications ( OR = 0.69 , P < 0.001 ) and shorter primary hospital admission ( OR = 0.88 , P < 0.001 ) . Shorter hospital stay was associated with preoperative carbohydrate and fluid loading ( OR = 0.89 , P = 0.001 ) , and totally intravenous anesthesia ( OR = 0.86 , P < 0.001 ) ; longer stay was associated with intraoperative epidural analgesia ( OR = 1.07 , P = 0.019 ) . Reduced postoperative complications were associated with restrictive perioperative intravenous fluids ( OR = 0.35 , P < 0.001 ) . CONCLUSIONS This analysis has demonstrated that in a large , international cohort of patients , increasing compliance with an ERAS program and the use of laparoscopic surgery independently improve outcome Enhanced recovery programmes ( ERPs ) have been shown to reduce length of hospital stay ( LOS ) and complications in colorectal surgery . Whether ERPs have the same benefits in open liver resection surgery is unclear , and r and omized clinical trials are lacking PURPOSE : This study was design ed to investigate the clinical outcome and recovery before and immediately after implementation of the enhanced recovery after surgery enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in colonic and rectal resection . METHODS : One hundred and sixty-eight consecutive patients in a single center underwent colorectal surgery before ( traditional , n = 69 ) and immediately after implementing enhanced recovery after surgery ( n = 99 ) . Rectal surgery was performed in 77 patients . Postoperative food and fluid intake , mobilization , physiologic function , and clinical outcome were measured prospect ively . RESULTS : Resumption of oral diet was achieved on postoperative day postoperative day 1 in the enhanced recovery after surgery group . In the enhanced recovery after surgery group , mobilization more than 6 hours daily was achieved on postoperative day 2 to 3 and passage of stool occurred on postoperative day 2 vs. postoperative day 5 in the traditional group ( P < 0.0001 ) . Muscle strength and lung function were less reduced in the enhanced recovery after surgery group ( P < 0.05 ) . Median hospital stay was reduced by 2 days ( P < 0.01 ) . Readmission rates increased ( 4 percent vs. 15 percent , P < 0.01 ) but total hospital stay was still lower in the enhanced recovery after surgery group ( P < 0.01 ) . After colonic resection , postoperative complications decreased in enhanced recovery after surgery ( 37 percent vs. 18 percent , P < 0.05 ) , whereas no change was found after rectal resection . CONCLUSION : Immediately after implementing enhanced recovery after surgery , recovery was improved and length of hospital stay was reduced . Notably , postoperative morbidity decreased only in patients undergoing colonic resection Background The enhanced recovery program ( ERP ) aims to reduce the metabolic response to surgery , hastening recovery and shortening hospital stay . Concerns exist regarding morbidity and hospital stay in elderly patients . The present study aim ed to compare the outcomes and compliance of elderly patients managed by an ERP protocol with a younger group . Methods A review was performed of a prospect i ve data base of patients undergoing colorectal resection managed under the ERP protocol between 2005 and 2010 . Patients were grouped into < 80 years and ≥80 years , and perioperative data were collated . The postoperative outcomes were compared with the goals set out by the ERP protocol . Results A total of 688 patients were included , 558 were < 80 years ( median : 66 years ; range : 17–79 years ) and 130 were ≥80 years ( median : 83 years ; range : 80–95 years ) . Some 96 % of operations were planned laparoscopically . Median total length of hospital stay was 6 days ( range : 1–108 days ) for the < 80 year group and 8 days ( range : 1–167 days ; P 0.363 ) for the elderly group , with a 30 day readmission rate of 8.6 % for the population and no significant differences between groups . The 30 day mortality was 5 % , with a significant difference between the two groups ( P < 0.0001 ) . Differences in protocol adherence were identified in the discontinuation of intravenous fluids , catheter removal , and early mobilization . Conclusions An enhanced recovery program is feasible for colorectal surgery patients ≥80 years of age , with similar compliance as the younger group to some aspects of the protocol and an acceptable readmission rate . Attention to improving compliance in the postoperative phase is necessary , particularly in such high-risk patients , as such improvement may reduce the morbidity and mortality Purpose The aim of this multi-institutional study was to prospect ively evaluate the safety and efficacy of an enhanced recovery after surgery ( ERAS ) protocol for colonic surgery . Methods The subjects of this study were 320 patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists ( ASA ) grade I or II physical status . Patients underwent elective open or laparoscopic colonic resection or high anterior resection between April 2011 and January 2014 at one of six institutions . Three hospitals implemented an ERAS protocol ( n = 159 ) , and three administered conventional care ( n = 161 ) . The primary outcome measure was the surgical complication rate . Results Most operations , irrespective of group , were performed laparoscopically . The incidence of a surgical complication was 17.0 % in the ERAS group vs. 16.1 % in the conventional group ( P = 0.842 ) , in which several non-surgical complications also arose . Oral food intake was implemented earlier for the ERAS group vs. the conventional group , after a median ( range ) of 1 ( 1–31 ) vs. 3 ( 1–9 ) days for the ERAS vs. conventional care groups , respectively ( P < 0.001 ) . The median length of postoperative hospital stay was reduced by 5.5 days for the ERAS group , being 8.5 ( 5–41 ) vs. 14 ( 7–56 ) days for the ERAS vs. conventional care groups , respectively ( P < 0.001 ) . Conclusion This multi-institutional controlled study clearly demonstrated that an ERAS protocol was efficient , without increasing the complication risk IMPORTANCE Enhanced recovery after surgery ( ERAS ) colorectal programs have shown to be successful at reducing length of stay in many international and academic centers ; however , their efficacy in a community hospital setting remains unclear . OBJECTIVE To determine if favorable results could be reproduced in a community hospital setting using our ERAS program , which was developed using core ERAS guidelines with the goal of accelerated recovery while also addressing other important outcomes affecting patient experience and safety . DESIGN , SETTING , AND PARTICIPANTS Prospect i ve study of ERAS program , a multidisciplinary effort involving anesthesia , preadmission staff , nursing , and surgery staff at a community hospital . The program was initiated in 2010 and was in full practice by 2011 . We assessed practice patterns and patient outcomes for all elective colon and rectal resection cases performed in 2009 ( prior to ERAS implementation ) , 2011 , and 2012 . MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Laparoscopic approach , narcotic use , length of stay , 30-day readmission , ileus ( defined as reinsertion of nasogastric tube ) , and intra-abdominal infection and association between colorectal cancer ( CRC ) diagnosis and these outcomes . RESULTS From 2009 to 2012 , the use of laparoscopy increased from 57.4 % to 88.8 % ( P < .001 ) . Length of stay decreased significantly ( 6.7 days vs 3.7 days , P < .001 ) , without an increase in 30-day readmission rate ( 17.6 % vs 12.5 % , P = .49 ) . Use of patient-controlled narcotic analgesia and duration of use decreased ( 63.2 % of patients vs 15 % , P < .001 ; 67.8 hours vs 47.1 hours , P = .02 ) . Ileus rate decreased from 13.2 % to 2.5 % ( P = .02 ) . Intra-abdominal infection decreased from 7.4 % to 2.5 % ( P = .24 ) . When comparing laparoscopic cases alone , similar results were observed . Following regression analysis , there were no statistically significant differences between CRC diagnosis and LOS , 30-day readmission rates , ileus , and intra-abdominal infection ( all P 's > .05 ) . Length of stay reductions result ed in an estimated cost savings of $ 3202 per patient ( 2011 ) and $ 4803 per patient ( 2012 ) . CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Implementation of this patient care-directed enhanced recovery program is feasible in a community hospital setting , and it is associated with decreased LOS without increased readmission or morbidity , as well as significant decreases in narcotic use and cost . Improved outcomes are independent of the laparoscopic approach and CRC diagnosis Background Fast-track protocol s are followed by an enhanced recovery , early return to bowel function and to complete nutrition , and a reduced hospital stay . Our study was design ed to implement fast-track protocol in our university hospital . Methods The 96 consecutive patients with colorectal neoplasm included in the study were r and omized in two equal groups : group 1 ( FT ) included patients undergoing colorectal surgery in a fast-track protocol , and group 2 ( C ) included patients undergoing colorectal surgery with a conventional care protocol .  As with other fast-track protocol s , our protocol included carbohydrate fluids load before operation , early mobilization and oral feeding , regular prokinetics , and multimodal postoperative analgesia .  Time to restoration of bowel function , to complete mobilization and feeding , length of hospital stay , and incidence of complications and readmissions were monitored . Results Time to mobilization , restoring of bowel function , and complete oral feeding were significantly shorter with fast-track protocol ( p = 0.001 , p = 0.042 , and p = 0.01 , respectively ) . Hospital stay also was shorter in the fast-track group ( p = 0.001 ) . The incidence of complications did not significantly differ with the study groups . Conclusions In our study , fast-track protocol result ed in a shorter time to mobilization , complete feeding , and discharge from hospital . Fast-track protocol did not increase the incidence of complications . However , we consider that our data require further confirmation with powered multicenter national studies Background and Aims : Enhanced recovery after surgery ( ERAS ) has reduced the median hospital stay from 8–10 days with traditional peri-operative routines to four days . The aim of the present study was to introduce the principles of ERAS in our hospital and measure the effect on hospital stay , complications and quality of life after discharge from hospital . Material and Methods : 94 consecutive patients , 40 males , 54 females , median age 66 years , were included in a prospect i ve non-r and omised observational study at Haukel and University Hospital and Haugesund Hospital from October 2000 until February 2003 . After a three-month preparation period , the principles of ERAS were implemented . The results were evaluated with question naires and by follow-ups 8–10 and 30 days after surgery . The results were compared to the results of colorectal surgery before introduction of accelerated recovery . Results : 45 ( 48 % ) and 73 ( 78 % ) patients were discharged within three and five days after surgery with ERAS , compared to zero and seven ( 5 % ) patients with traditional recovery . The complication rate with ERAS was 31 % , and the readmission rate was 15 % . After one week , 57 % had resumed their daily activities at home . After 30 days , 65 % of the patients had resumed their normal and leisure activities . Conclusion : After a proper preparation period , ERAS principles may be implemented in surgical department , and is followed by a reduced median hospital stay and rapid return to normal daily activities for most patients after colorectal surgery Objective : To determine the cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery pathways ( ERPs ) versus conventional care for patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery . Background : ERPs for colorectal surgery are clinical ly effective , but their cost-effectiveness is unknown . Methods : A multi-institutional prospect i ve cohort cost-effectiveness analysis was performed . Adult patients undergoing elective colorectal resection at 2 university-affiliated institutions from October 2012 to October 2013 were enrolled . One center used an ERP , whereas the other did not . Postoperative outcomes were recorded up to 60 days . Total costs were reported in 2013 Canadian dollars . Effectiveness was measured using the SF-6D , a health utility measure vali date d for postoperative recovery . Uncertainty was expressed using bootstrapped estimates ( 10,000 repetitions ) . Results : A total of 180 patients were included  ( conventional care : n = 95 ; ERP : n = 95 ) . There were no differences in patient characteristics except for a higher proportion of laparoscopy in the ERP group . Mean length of stay was shorter in the ERP group ( 6.5 vs 9.8 days ; P = 0.017 ) , but there were no differences in complications or readmissions . Patients in the ERP group returned to work quicker and had less caregiver burden . There was no difference in quality of life between the 2 groups . The cost of the ERP program was $ 153 per patient . Overall societal costs were lower in the ERP group ( mean difference = −2985 ; 95 % confidence interval , −5753 to −373 ) . The ERP had a greater than 99 % probability of cost-effectiveness . The results were insensitive to a range of assumptions and subgroups . Conclusions : Enhanced recovery is cost-effective compared with conventional perioperative management for elective colorectal resection Objective Optimizing peri‐operative care using an enhanced recovery programme improves short‐term outcomes following colonic resection . This study compared a prospect i ve group of patients undergoing resection of colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme , with a prospect ively studied historic cohort receiving conventional care Introduction An accelerated multi-modal rehabilitation programme may improve the recuperation and reduce the complication rate in patients undergoing colorectal surgery . The aim of this study was to see whether fast-track recovery is feasible in various patient groups . Patients and methods Data on all patients operated for intestinal pathology from July 2006–April 2008 were prospect ively collected for this prospect i ve study . All included patients entered a multi-modal rehabilitation programme .  Peri- and postoperative complications and readmissions , pathology reports and operation characteristics were recorded prospect ively . Results Three hundred and forty-eight patients underwent colorectal surgery .  No difference in readmission rate was found between various patient groups . The only significant differences after multivariate regression analysis were in re-operation rate and length of stay in favour of the elective surgery group . Conclusions Fast-track modalities can be introduced with a low complication rate in all patient groups . Length of stay in elderly patients averages 10 days , implying that this group can not be considered as “ fast track ” , although the same protocol can also be applied in this group . Better organization of the aftercare might however considerably change the length of stay of elderly patients , since postoperative complications do not differ between old and young patients BACKGROUND Enhanced Recovery Programmes ( ERPs ) have been shown to benefit recovery following major surgery in selected centres and patient groups , but their wider applicability requires continued evaluation . The aims of this study were to assess the outcomes of the first 400 consecutive , non-selected patients , undergoing major elective colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery programme at a UK District General hospital and to examine the effects of patient risk factors and operative approach on outcomes . METHODS Since September 2005 all patients undergoing major elective colon and rectal surgery at our hospital have been treated within an ERP and their data recorded prospect ively on a data base . Safety and efficacy outcomes for the first 400 patients were compared using SPSS v14.0 with both a retrospective , pre-ERP group ; and according to patient risk factors and operative approaches . RESULTS Median length of stays ( LOS ) reduced from 9 days ( IQR 7 - 11 ) to 6 days ( IQR 5 - 10 ) after introduction of the ERP ( p < 0.001 ) . No statistically significant differences in LOS were observed between elderly ( ≥80 years ) and younger patients or between different BMI groups . American Society of Anesthesiologists ( ASA ) grade 3 patients demonstrated significantly longer median LOS than those with ASA grade s 1 and 2 . Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery  had median LOS of 6 days ( IQR 4 - 8 ) compared to 7 days ( IQR 5 - 10 ) for open procedures ( p < 0.001 ) . No differences in morbidity or mortality were observed between the groups . CONCLUSIONS Unselected application of an ERP in our unit has been associated with reductions in post-operative LOS . The ERP was safe and effective when applied to all our study patients independent of age and BMI . Despite LOS being longer in ASA grade 3 patients , application of the ERP to this higher risk group was not associated with significantly increased morbidity or mortality . Laparoscopic surgery result ed in additional modest reductions in LOS compared to open surgery within the ERP Background During the last two decades the use of laparoscopic resection and a multimodal approach known as an enhanced recovery programme , have been major changes in colorectal perioperative care . Clinical outcome improves using laparoscopic surgery to resect colorectal cancer but until recently no multicentre trial evidence had been reported regarding whether the benefits of laparoscopy still exist when open surgery is optimized within an enhanced recovery programme . The EnROL trial ( Enhanced Recovery Open versus Laparoscopic ) examines the hypothesis that laparoscopic surgery within an enhanced recovery programme will provide superior postoperative outcomes when compared to conventional open resection of colorectal cancer within the same programme . Methods / design EnROL is a phase III , multicentre , r and omised trial of laparoscopic versus open resection of colon and rectal cancer with blinding of patients and outcome observers to the treatment allocation for the first 7 days post-operatively , or until discharge if earlier . 202 patients will be recruited at approximately 12 UK hospitals and r and omised using minimization at a central computer system in a 1:1 ratio . Recruiting surgeons will previously have performed > 100 laparoscopic colorectal resections  and > 50  open total mesorectal excisions to minimize conversion . Eligible patients are those suitable for elective resection using either technique . Excluded patients include : those with acute intestinal obstruction and patients in whom conversion from laparoscopic to open procedure is likely . The primary outcome is physical fatigue as measured by the physical fatigue domain of the multidimensional fatigue inventory 20 ( MFI-20 ) with secondary outcomes including postoperative hospital stay ; complications ; reoperation and readmission ; quality of life indicators ; cosmetic assessment s ; st and ardized performance indicators ; health economic analysis ; the other four domains of the MFI-20 . Pathological assessment of surgical quality will also be undertaken and compliance with the enhanced recovery programme will be recorded for all patients . Discussion Should this trial demonstrate that laparoscopic surgery confers a significant clinical and /or health economic benefit this will further support the transition to this type of surgery , with implication s for the training of surgeons and re source allocation . Trial registration IS RCT N48516968 Background Increased adherence with enhanced recovery pathways ( ERP ) is associated with improved outcomes . However , adherence to postoperative elements that rely on patient participation remains suboptimal . Mobile device apps may improve delivery of health education material and have the potential to foster behavior change and improve patient compliance . The objective of this study was to estimate the extent to which a novel mobile device app affects adherence to an ERP for colorectal surgery in comparison to st and ard written education . Methods This was a superiority , parallel-group , assessor-blind , sham-controlled r and omized trial involving 97 patients undergoing colorectal resection . Participants were r and omly assigned with a 1:1 ratio into one of two groups : ( 1 ) iPad including a novel mobile device app for postoperative education and self- assessment of recovery , or ( 2 ) iPad without the app . The primary outcome measure was mean adherence ( % ) to a bundle of five postoperative ERP elements requiring patient participation : mobilization , gastrointestinal motility stimulation , breathing exercises , and consumption of oral liquids and nutritional drinks . Results In the intervention group , app usage was high ( 94 % completed surveys on POD0 , 82 % on POD1 , 72 % on POD2 ) . Mean overall adherence to the bundle on the two first postoperative days was similar between groups : 59 % ( 95 % CI 52–66 % ) in the intervention group and 62 % ( 95 % CI 56–68 % ) in the control group [ Adjusted mean difference 2.4 % ( 95 % CI − 5 to 10 % ) p = 0.53 ] . Conclusions In this r and omized trial , access to a mobile health application did not improve adherence to a well-established enhanced recovery pathway in colorectal surgery patients , when compared to st and ard written patient education . Future research should evaluate the impact of applications integrating novel behavioral change techniques , particularly in context s where adherence is low
In predefined subgroup analyses , findings did not vary by surgical approach ( open vs laparoscopic ) or colorectal condition .
CONCLUSIONS : Enhanced recovery protocol s for adults undergoing colorectal surgery improve patient outcomes with no increase in adverse events .
Evidence was insufficient regarding which components , or component combinations , are key to improving patient outcomes .
BACKGROUND : Enhanced surgical recovery protocol s are design ed to reduce hospital length of stay and health care costs .
OBJECTIVE : This study aims to systematic ally review and summarize evidence from r and omized and controlled clinical trials comparing enhanced recovery protocol s versus usual care in  adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery with emphasis on recent trials , protocol components , and subgroups for surgical approach and colorectal condition .