Expanding enhanced recovery protocols for cardiac surgery to include the patient voice: a scoping review protocol

Abstract

Background Cardiac surgery is becoming increasingly common in older, more vulnerable adults. A focus on timely and complete medical and functional recovery has led to the development of enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) for a number of surgical procedures and subspecialties, including cardiac surgery (ERAS® Cardiac). An element that is often overlooked in the development and implementation of ERPs is the involvement of key stakeholder groups, including surgery patients and caregivers (e.g., family and/or friends). The aim of this study is to describe a protocol for a scoping review of cardiac patient and caregiver preferences and outcomes relevant to cardiac surgery ERPs. Methods Using Arksey and O’Malley’s et al six-stage framework for scoping review methodologies with adaptions from Levac et al. (Represent Interv: 1–18, 2012), a scoping review of existing literature describing patient- and caregiver-identified preferences and outcomes as they relate to care received in the perioperative period of cardiac surgery will be undertaken. The search for relevant articles will be conducted using electronic databases (i.e., the Cochrane Library, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Embase), as well as through a search of the grey literature (e.g., CPG Infobase, Heart and Stroke Foundation, ProQuest Theses and Dissertations, Google Advanced, and Prospero). Published and unpublished full-text articles written in English, published after the year 2000, and that relate to the research question will be included. Central to the design of this scoping review is our collaboration with two patient partners who possess lived experience as cardiac surgery patients. Discussion This review will identify strategies that can be integrated into ERPs for cardiac surgery which align with patient- and caregiver-defined values. Broadly, it is our goal to demonstrate the added value of patient engagement in research to aid in the success of system change processes.

[Retracted] Emergency Medicine with Advanced Surgery Protocols: A Review

“…With a high mortality rate and increased risk of stroke, postoperative atrial fibrillation affects roughly 38% of patients having mitral valve surgery. But for patients having mitral surgery, the Maze III procedure is the gold standard for treating atrial fibrillation currently: over 85% of patients who undergo the standard Maze surgery are cured of atrial fibrillation [ 36 ], but because to its complexity, the Maze III is only performed by a small number of surgeons. Though thoracoscopic and minimally invasive approaches have been made easier by new ablation technologies like radiofrequency, microwave, and cryotherapy, the indications for surgical treatment of atrial fibrillation will likely continue to be restricted to those with concurrent cardiac surgical pathology needing surgery.…”

Protocol for a scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews

“…Uniquely, our entire research team (including two patient co-researchers, also commonly referred to as "patient partners" or "research collaborators") has experience engaging patients as co-producers of prior scoping reviews. The two patient co-researchers (AG and BB) have lived experience as cardiac surgery patients, previous co-research experiences, and have co-authored other publications and knowledge translation products [ 15 , 16 ]. They collaborated on the development of this protocol through research team meetings and provided feedback on this resultant protocol submission.…”

“…Patient is an overarching term that is inclusive of individuals with personal experience of a health issue or accessing the healthcare system, and informal caregivers, including family and friends [ 12 ]. Caregiver refers to those persons with interest in the patient’s health and wellbeing who are not remunerated for their role in the patient’s life [ 15 ]. Context Arksey and O’Malley six-stage scoping review framework This framework proposes a sixth (historically optional) stakeholder consultation stage.…”

“…Caregiver refers to those persons with interest in the patient’s health and wellbeing who are not remunerated for their role in the patient’s life [ 15 ].…”

A Virtual, Multi-Session Workshop Model for Integrating Patient and Public Perspectives in Research Analysis and Interpretation

“…Given the lack of pragmatic methodologies for patient engagement in research at different stages of the research process, the purpose of this article is to present a model for virtual consultation of patients and the public during data analysis and/or interpretation. The context for model development was a scoping review study aimed at understanding the care preferences and prioritized outcomes of cardiac surgery patients and caregivers (Oravec et al, 2021a(Oravec et al, , 2021b. While patients were part of our team from conception to translation, scoping review methodologies traditionally involve a formal, post hoc consultation stage with research stakeholders.…”