Evaluate the Effectiveness of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Versus Conventional Approach in Benign Gynecological Surgeries: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) model versus conventional approach in benign gynecological surgeries (incorporating various routes of surgery). Methods This was a randomized controlled trial wherein patients undergoing gynecological surgery for benign indications from January 2019 to July 2020 were recruited and randomized into ERAS and conventional protocol groups using block randomization. The intended primary outcome was to compare the median length of hospital stay in both groups. "Fit for discharge" criteria were used to assess the length of stay as patients who belonged to hilly terrain with limited transportation facilities stayed for a longer duration. Results A total of 180 patients were recruited and 90 each was randomized into ERAS and conventional protocol groups. The difference in length of hospital stay between ERAS (36 hours, range 24-96 hours) and conventional group (72 hours, range: 24-144 hours) was significant (p<0.01). A statistically significant difference was noted in the time for recovery of bowel function and tolerance for diet in the ERAS group. No significant difference in complications and readmission (within 30 days) rate was seen between the two groups. Quality of life as assessed by the World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief Version (WHO-QOL BREF) on the day of discharge and day 30 was higher in the ERAS group in physical and psychological domains, while no difference was seen in environmental and social domains. Conclusion This study as an institutional experience strengthens the existing evidence regarding the efficacy of ERAS in reducing hospital stay and improving quality of life compared to the conventional perioperative management protocol.