Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) database in Alberta, Canada and a comparative analysis with Swedish and Swiss data

Abstract Background The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Interactive Audit System (EIAS) is a retrospective database containing information about the pre-, intra-, and post-operative components of surgical patient care. EIAS was created to allow centers that have adopted ERAS protocols to asse...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: K. Sauro, A. Thomas, L. Bakunda, C. Smith, S. Ibadin, T. Kuzma, G. Nelson
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2025-08-01
Series:BMC Surgery
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-025-03085-3
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849344268415533056
author K. Sauro
A. Thomas
L. Bakunda
C. Smith
S. Ibadin
T. Kuzma
G. Nelson
author_facet K. Sauro
A. Thomas
L. Bakunda
C. Smith
S. Ibadin
T. Kuzma
G. Nelson
author_sort K. Sauro
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Interactive Audit System (EIAS) is a retrospective database containing information about the pre-, intra-, and post-operative components of surgical patient care. EIAS was created to allow centers that have adopted ERAS protocols to assess their performance. To have confidence in the data collected by EIAS, its completeness, accuracy and validity must be assessed. This study aims to assess the validity of the Alberta EIAS when compared to the gold standard measurement for patient data, the patient electronic medical record (EMR). Methods Four sites that implemented ERAS across Alberta were included, with 20 to 60 patient EMRs pulled from each site. Data on 12 pre-specified ERAS elements and three outcome variables was abstracted from patient EMRs and compared to the corresponding variables from EIAS. Validation criteria included (I) accuracy (agreement between EMR and EIAS) and (II) missingness (percent of data that was missing in patients EMR and EIAS). The estimates of accuracy were compared to estimates of accuracy from two other EIAS validation studies using meta-analysis. Results A total of 113 patient charts were reviewed across four sites. The mean agreement between chart review and EIAS was 73.6% (standard deviation, SD = 14.5) with a mean sensitivity of 70.3 (SD = 32.8) and mean specificity of 50.1 (SD = 42.5). Agreement between chart review and EIAS was better among outcomes (agreement for re-operation was 93.7%) than it was for accuracy of documentation of the ERAS elements (mean agreement = 73.6%). Agreement varied by site (68.5% to 94.4%) and reviewer (68.0% to 96.6%). Across all 12 ERAS elements and three outcome variables, a mean of 11.4% of data were missing, with re-operation having the greatest proportion of missing data (15.9%) and termination of drains and early mobilization with the lowest proportion of missing data (9.7%). Estimates of accuracy were not different between studies (I2 = 56.4%, p = 0.101). Conclusions In Alberta, the accuracy and completeness of EIAS data is similar to that of Sweden and Switzerland, but is varied. This study found that data abstractors that are medically trained, and trained in standardized data abstraction are important determinants of generating high quality data, highlighting the need for adequate resources for data collection.
format Article
id doaj-art-98586e516d814bab86fb70d77d972ea0
institution Kabale University
issn 1471-2482
language English
publishDate 2025-08-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Surgery
spelling doaj-art-98586e516d814bab86fb70d77d972ea02025-08-20T03:42:43ZengBMCBMC Surgery1471-24822025-08-012511810.1186/s12893-025-03085-3Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) database in Alberta, Canada and a comparative analysis with Swedish and Swiss dataK. Sauro0A. Thomas1L. Bakunda2C. Smith3S. Ibadin4T. Kuzma5G. Nelson6Department of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of CalgaryDepartment of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of CalgaryDepartment of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of CalgaryDepartment of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of CalgaryDepartment of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of CalgaryDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of CalgaryDepartment of Oncology & Charbonneau Cancer Institute, Cumming School of Medicine, University of CalgaryAbstract Background The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Interactive Audit System (EIAS) is a retrospective database containing information about the pre-, intra-, and post-operative components of surgical patient care. EIAS was created to allow centers that have adopted ERAS protocols to assess their performance. To have confidence in the data collected by EIAS, its completeness, accuracy and validity must be assessed. This study aims to assess the validity of the Alberta EIAS when compared to the gold standard measurement for patient data, the patient electronic medical record (EMR). Methods Four sites that implemented ERAS across Alberta were included, with 20 to 60 patient EMRs pulled from each site. Data on 12 pre-specified ERAS elements and three outcome variables was abstracted from patient EMRs and compared to the corresponding variables from EIAS. Validation criteria included (I) accuracy (agreement between EMR and EIAS) and (II) missingness (percent of data that was missing in patients EMR and EIAS). The estimates of accuracy were compared to estimates of accuracy from two other EIAS validation studies using meta-analysis. Results A total of 113 patient charts were reviewed across four sites. The mean agreement between chart review and EIAS was 73.6% (standard deviation, SD = 14.5) with a mean sensitivity of 70.3 (SD = 32.8) and mean specificity of 50.1 (SD = 42.5). Agreement between chart review and EIAS was better among outcomes (agreement for re-operation was 93.7%) than it was for accuracy of documentation of the ERAS elements (mean agreement = 73.6%). Agreement varied by site (68.5% to 94.4%) and reviewer (68.0% to 96.6%). Across all 12 ERAS elements and three outcome variables, a mean of 11.4% of data were missing, with re-operation having the greatest proportion of missing data (15.9%) and termination of drains and early mobilization with the lowest proportion of missing data (9.7%). Estimates of accuracy were not different between studies (I2 = 56.4%, p = 0.101). Conclusions In Alberta, the accuracy and completeness of EIAS data is similar to that of Sweden and Switzerland, but is varied. This study found that data abstractors that are medically trained, and trained in standardized data abstraction are important determinants of generating high quality data, highlighting the need for adequate resources for data collection.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-025-03085-3Outcomes researchData qualityEnhanced recovery after surgery interactive audit system
spellingShingle K. Sauro
A. Thomas
L. Bakunda
C. Smith
S. Ibadin
T. Kuzma
G. Nelson
Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) database in Alberta, Canada and a comparative analysis with Swedish and Swiss data
BMC Surgery
Outcomes research
Data quality
Enhanced recovery after surgery interactive audit system
title Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) database in Alberta, Canada and a comparative analysis with Swedish and Swiss data
title_full Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) database in Alberta, Canada and a comparative analysis with Swedish and Swiss data
title_fullStr Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) database in Alberta, Canada and a comparative analysis with Swedish and Swiss data
title_full_unstemmed Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) database in Alberta, Canada and a comparative analysis with Swedish and Swiss data
title_short Validation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) database in Alberta, Canada and a comparative analysis with Swedish and Swiss data
title_sort validation of the enhanced recovery after surgery eras database in alberta canada and a comparative analysis with swedish and swiss data
topic Outcomes research
Data quality
Enhanced recovery after surgery interactive audit system
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-025-03085-3
work_keys_str_mv AT ksauro validationoftheenhancedrecoveryaftersurgeryerasdatabaseinalbertacanadaandacomparativeanalysiswithswedishandswissdata
AT athomas validationoftheenhancedrecoveryaftersurgeryerasdatabaseinalbertacanadaandacomparativeanalysiswithswedishandswissdata
AT lbakunda validationoftheenhancedrecoveryaftersurgeryerasdatabaseinalbertacanadaandacomparativeanalysiswithswedishandswissdata
AT csmith validationoftheenhancedrecoveryaftersurgeryerasdatabaseinalbertacanadaandacomparativeanalysiswithswedishandswissdata
AT sibadin validationoftheenhancedrecoveryaftersurgeryerasdatabaseinalbertacanadaandacomparativeanalysiswithswedishandswissdata
AT tkuzma validationoftheenhancedrecoveryaftersurgeryerasdatabaseinalbertacanadaandacomparativeanalysiswithswedishandswissdata
AT gnelson validationoftheenhancedrecoveryaftersurgeryerasdatabaseinalbertacanadaandacomparativeanalysiswithswedishandswissdata