Combined use of advanced practice providers and care pathways reduces the duration of stay after surgery for gastrointestinal malignancies



      The gastrointestinal surgical oncology service at our comprehensive cancer center sought to improve the quality of postsurgical inpatient care while increasing discharge efficiency.


      A stakeholder team established standard postsurgical care pathways and dedicated inpatient advanced practice provider positions. We compared postsurgical length of stay before (July 2017 to April 2018) and after (May 2018 to April 2019) the interventions using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. We benchmarked length of stay to National Surgical Quality Improvement Project and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services geometric mean length of stay. We also compared readmission rates and surgeon-specific Hospital Consumer Assessment of Health Care Provider and Systems and Press-Ganey scores.


      There were 462 cases before and 563 after the interventions. Postintervention, median length of stay decreased from 6.50 to 6.00 days (P = .017). There was a ≥1-day reduction for 10 of 14 case types with significant length of stay decreases for robotic esophagectomy (P = .001), liver resection (P = .023), and cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (P = .030). More case types met or exceeded Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and National Surgical Quality Improvement Project benchmarks after the interventions. Readmission rates were stable (preintervention 9.3%, postintervention 10.3%, P = .585). Press-Ganey and HCAHPS measures were stable or improved in all evaluated domains.


      Incorporating advanced practice providers and care pathways into gastrointestinal surgical oncology inpatient care was associated with reduced length of stay without declination in readmission rates or patient experience measures.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Institute of Medicine
        Ensuring Quality Cancer Care Through the Oncology Workforce: Sustaining Research and Care in the 21st Centry.
        Workshop Summary, Washington, DC2009
        • Mariotto A.B.
        • Yabroff K.R.
        • Shao Y.
        • Feuer E.J.
        • Brown M.L.
        Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011; 103: 117-128
        • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Medical Expenditure Panel Survey
        Trends in use and expenditures for cancer treatment among adults 18 and older, US civilian noninstitutionalized population, 2001 and 2011.
        (Available from:)
        • Tsilimigras D.I.
        • Paredes A.Z.
        • et al.
        Comparing textbook outcomes among patients undergoing surgery for cancer at US News & World Report ranked hospitals.
        J Surg Oncol. 2020; 121: 927-935
        • Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
        Hospital acute inpatient services payment system.
        (Available from:)
        • Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
        Acute Care Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System.
        (Available from:)
      1. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Hospital consumer assessment of healthcare providers and systems. Available from: Accessed February 3, 2020.

        • Casarett D.
        • Karlawish J.H.
        • Sugarman J.
        Determining when quality improvement initiatives should be considered research: Proposed criteria and potential implications.
        JAMA. 2000; 283: 2275-2280
        • Moote M.
        • Krsek C.
        • Kleinpell R.
        • Todd B.
        Physician assistant and nurse practitioner utilization in academic medical centers.
        Am J Med Qual. 2011; 26: 452-460
        • Timmermans M.J.C.
        • van Vught A.J.A.H.
        • Yvonne Y.A.S.
        • et al.
        The impact of the implementation of physician assistants in inpatient care: A multicenter matched-controlled study.
        PLoS One. 2017; 12e0178212
        • Johal J.
        • Dodd A.
        Physician extenders on surgical services: A systematic review.
        Can J Surg. 2017; 60: 172-178
        • Iannuzzi M.C.
        • Iannuzzi J.C.
        • Holtsbery A.
        • Wright S.M.
        • Knohl S.J.
        Comparing hospitalist-resident to hospitalist-midlevel practitioner team performance on length of stay and direct patient care cost.
        J Grad Med Educ. 2015; 7: 65-69
        • Yan J.F.
        • Pan Y.
        • Chen K.
        • Zhu H.P.
        • Chen Q.L.
        Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy is associated with lower morbidity compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and high-quality nonrandomized studies.
        Medicine (Baltimore). 2019; 98e16730
        • Aiello F.A.
        • Roddy S.P.
        Inpatient coding and the diagnosis-related group.
        J Vasc Surg. 2017; 66: 1621-1623
        • United States Government Accountability Office
        Payment methods for certain cancer hospitals should be revised to promote efficiency. United States Government Accountability Office, Washington, DC2015
        • Mehta R.
        • Tsilimigras D.I.
        • Paredes A.Z.
        • et al.
        Dedicated cancer centers are more likely to achieve a textbook outcome following hepatopancreatic surgery.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 2020; 27: 1889-1897
        • Rotter T.
        • Kinsman L.
        • James E.
        • et al.
        Clinical pathways: Effects on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of stay and hospital costs.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010; : CD006632