The Effects of Clinical Pathways on Professional Practice, Patient Outcomes, Length of Stay, and Hospital Costs: Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Department of International Health, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine & Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Evaluation &amp the Health Professions (Impact Factor: 1.67). 05/2011; 35(1):3-27. DOI: 10.1177/0163278711407313
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This paper is a summary version of the previously published Cochrane review. It may increase the reach of the topic to health researchers and practitioners and encourage further discussion. The systematic review aims to summarize the evidence and assess the effect of clinical pathways on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of hospital stay, and hospital costs. The authors searched the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and bibliographic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, NHS EED, and Global Health. Twenty-seven studies considering a total of 11,398 participants were included for analysis. The main results were a reduction in in-hospital complications (odds ratio 0.58: 95% CI [0.36, 0.94] and improved documentation (odds ratio 11.95: 95% CI [4.72, 30.30]) associated with clinical pathways. Considerable variation in study design and settings prevented statistical pooling of results for length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs. The authors concluded that clinical pathways are associated with reduced in-hospital complications and improved documentation.

Download full-text


Available from: Pamela Claire Snow, Aug 05, 2015
1 Follower
  • Source
    • "The outcomes from the majority of clinical care pathways have resulted in significantly lower cost and other surrogate measures in terms of hospitalization costs and charges or insurance points for pathway groups [8]. Therefore, clinical care pathways are associated with a more efficient use of resources and efficiency of care [8]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background. Patients with nonepileptic seizures (NES) are challenging to treat for myriad reasons. Often patients may be misdiagnosed with having epilepsy and then may suffer unintended consequences of treatment side effects with antiepileptic medication. In addition, patients may be maligned by health care providers due to a lack of ownership by both psychiatrists and neurologists and a dearth of dedicated professionals who are able to effectively treat and reduce severity and frequency of symptoms. Aims of Case Report. Many psychiatrists and neurologists are unaware of the extent of the barriers to care faced by patients with NES (PWNES) and the degree of perception of maltreatment or lack of therapeutic alliance at various stages of their care, including medical workup, video-EEG monitoring, and follow-up plans. We present the case of a patient with NES who experienced numerous barriers as well as incoordination to her care despite being offered a breadth of resources and discuss the quality improvement opportunities that may exist to improve care of patients with NES. Conclusion. No known literature has documented the extensive barriers to care of PWNES in parallel to quality improvement opportunities for improving their care. We endeavor to contribute to the overall formulation and development of a clinical care pathway for PWNES.
    09/2014; 2014. DOI:10.1155/2014/201575
  • 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
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an effective, but also cost-intensive health care intervention for end stage osteoarthritis. This investigation was designed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TKA before versus after introduction of an interdisciplinary clinical pathway from a University Orthopedic Surgery Department's cost perspective as an interdisciplinary full service health care provider. A prospective trial recruited two sequential cohorts of 132 and 128 consecutive patients, who were interviewed by means of the WOMAC questionnaire. Direct process costs from the health care providers' perspective were estimated according to the German DRG calculation framework. The health economic evaluation was based on margiual cost-effectveness ratios (MCERs); an individual marginal cost effectiveness relation≤100 € per % WOMAC index increase was considered as primary endpoint of the confirmatory cohort comparison. The interdisciplinary clinical pathway under consideration primarily consisted of a voluntary preoperative personal briefing of patients concerning postoperatively expectable progess in health status and optimum use of walking aids after surgery. All patients were supplied with written information on these topics, attendance of the personal briefing also included preoperative training for postoperative mobilisation by the Department's physiotherapeutic staff. An individual marginal cost effectiveness relation≤100 €/% WOMAC index increase was found in 38% of the patients in the pre pathway implementation cohort versus in 30% of the post pathway implementation cohort (Fisher p=0.278). Both cohorts showed substantial improvement in WOMAC scores (39 versus 35% in median), whereas the cohort did not differ significantly in the median WOMAC score before surgery (41% for the pre pathway cohort versus 44% for the post pathway cohort). Despite a locally significant decrease in costs (4303 versus 4194 € in median), the individual cost/benefit relation became worse after introduction of the pathway: for the first cohort the MCER was estimated 108 € per gained % WOMAC index increase (86-150 €/%) versus 118 €/% WOMAC gain (93-173 €/%) in the second cohort after pathway implementation. In summary, the proposed critical pathway for TKA could be shown to be significantly cost efficient, but not cost effective concerning functional outcome, when the above individual marginal cost effectiveness criterion was concentrated on. The introduction of an interdisciplinary clinical pathway does not necessarily improve patient related outcomes. On the contrary, cost effectiveness from the health care providers' perspective may even turn out remarkably reduced in the setting considered here (functional outcome assessment after treatment by a full service health care provider).
    BMC Health Services Research 12/2011; 11:338. DOI:10.1186/1472-6963-11-338 · 1.66 Impact Factor
Show more