Does the organization of care processes affect outcomes in patients undergoing total joint replacement?

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice (Impact Factor: 1.58). 01/2010; 16(1):121 - 128. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01130.x

ABSTRACT Background  Surgeons realize that safe and efficient care processes for total joint replacement requires more than just well-performed operations. Orthopaedic teams are reorganizing care process to improve efficacy and shorten length of stay. Little is known on the impact of organizational changes on patient outcome. This paper studies the relation between the organization of care processes and patient outcomes in hip and knee. Clinical pathways are used as one of the methods to structure the care process. Although evidence is available on the effect of pathways in total joint replacement, their impact with the organization of the care process has not been studied previously.Methods  A cross-sectional multicentre study was performed on 39 care processes and 737 consecutive patients. Regression models were used to analyse the relation between the organization of the care process and risk-adjusted patient outcomes. The use of pathways and the organization of the care process, measured by the Care Process Self Evaluation Tool (CPSET), were measured at organizational level. Length of stay, pain, mobility and elapsed time to discharge were measured at patient level.Results  The use of pathways had a positive effect on four out of five subscales and the overall CPSET score. Using pathways decreased length of stay (P = 0.014), pain (P = 0.052) and elapsed time to discharge (P = 0.003). The CPSET subscale communication was related with three risk adjusted outcomes. Multivariate analysis demonstrated a significant effect by three different variables on the length of stay; (1) use of pathways; (2) coordination of care processes; and (3) communication with patients and family. Both the use of pathways and coordination of the care process were determinants for the elapsed time to discharge. A significant interaction effect was found between use of pathways and coordination of the care process.Conclusion  This large multicentre study revealed the relation between the use of pathways, organization of the care process and patient outcomes. This information is important for both clinicians and managers to understand and further improve the organization of orthopaedic care.Level of evidence  Level I prognostic study.

Download full-text


Available from: Emmanuel Lesaffre, Jul 02, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the use of clinical pathways for hip and knee joint replacements when compared with standard medical care. The impact of clinical pathways was evaluated assessing the major outcomes of in-hospital hip and knee joint replacement processes: postoperative complications, number of patients discharged at home, length of in-hospital stay and direct costs. Medline, Cinahl, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. The search was performed from 1975 to 2007. Each study was assessed independently by two reviewers. The assessment of methodological quality of the included studies was based on the Jadad methodological approach and on the New Castle Ottawa Scale. Data analysis abided by the guidelines set out by The Cochrane Collaboration regarding statistical methods. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan software, version 4.2. Twenty-two studies met the study inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis for a total sample of 6,316 patients. The aggregate overall results showed significantly fewer patients suffering postoperative complications in the clinical pathways group when compared with the standard care group. A shorter length of stay in the clinical pathway group was also observed and lower costs during hospital stay were associated with the use of the clinical pathways. No significant differences were found in the rates of discharge to home. The results of this meta-analysis show that clinical pathways can significantly improve the quality of care even if it is not possible to conclude that the implementation of clinical pathways is a cost-effective process, because none of the included studies analysed the cost of the development and implementation of the pathways. Based on the results we assume that pathways have impact on the organisation of care if the care process is structured in a standardised way, teams critically analyse the actual organisation of the process and the multidisciplinary team is highly involved in the re-organisation. Further studies should focus on the evaluation of pathways as complex interventions to help to understand which mechanisms within the clinical pathways can really improve the quality of care. With the need for knee and hip joint replacement on the rise, the use of clinical pathways might contribute to better quality of care and cost-effectiveness.
    BMC Medicine 08/2009; 7:32. DOI:10.1186/1741-7015-7-32 · 7.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Care pathways, also known as clinical pathways, critical pathways or integrated care pathways, are used all over the world. Although they are used internationally, there are still a large number of misunderstandings. The goal of this paper is to provide an overview on the history of pathways and how pathways are actually perceived and defined. Pathways are more than just a document in the patient record. They are a concept for making patient-focused care operational and supporting the modelling of patient groups with different levels of predictability. Pathways are a method within the field of continuous quality improvement and are used in daily practice as a product in the patient record. This paper explains these different issues and provides an extensive list of references that should support pathway facilitators, clinicians, managers and policy-makers in their search for excellence.
    International Journal of Care Pathways 09/2010; 14(3):117-123. DOI:10.1258/jicp.2010.010019
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aim  Reducing variations by standardizing the key interventions in clinical processes is an effective tool to minimize the probability of medical errors. Thus, we determined whether variations exist in the key interventions included in care pathway documents (CPDs) of different organizations and in the timing of these interventions during the care process. Methods  We invited members of the Belgian Dutch Clinical Pathway Network to send their CPDs for external review. We analysed 19 CPDs for total knee arthroplasty. International guidelines were consulted for definition of key interventions. Documentation of these interventions in the pathway documents was checked. Results  From the 19 CPDs analysed, we retrieved 18 key interventions. Nine of these key interventions appeared in at least 80% of the care pathways. Only two key interventions appeared in all pathway documents. Nine out of 12 interventions that appeared in at least 80% of the pathway documents showed a variation of 1 day in the timing of care from the median timing. Conclusion  We conclude that important variation exists in the included interventions and in their timing. The results of this study suggest that, before use in daily patient care, CPDs should be reviewed by peers and checked to ensure that all evidence-based key interventions are included and properly planned. Only in this way can pathways documents be used interprofessionally during the entire perioperative period in the search for optimal quality and patient safety.
    Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 08/2011; 19(1). DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01760.x · 1.58 Impact Factor
Show more