TY - JOUR
T1 - Overview on the target population and methods used in care pathway projects
T2 - A narrative review
AU - Seys, Deborah
AU - Coeckelberghs, Ellen
AU - Sermeus, Walter
AU - Van Zelm, Ruben
AU - Panella, Massimiliano
AU - Babu Payedimarri, Anil
AU - Vanhaecht, Kris
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
PY - 2021/10
Y1 - 2021/10
N2 - Background: There is evidence that the efficiency and effectiveness of care processes can be improved in all countries. Care pathways (CPs) are proposed as a method to improve the quality of care by reducing variation. During the last decades, CPs have been intensively used in practice. The objective of this study is to examine the study designs for investigating CPs, for which pathologies CPs are used and what the reported indicators to measure the impact of CPs are. Methods: A narrative review of the literature published from 2015 to 2019 was performed. Results: We identified 286 studies, of which 207 evaluated the impact of CPs, 33 were review articles, 29 studies described the development of a CP, 12 were study protocols and 5 opinion papers. The most frequently reported study design for studying the impact of a CP is pre-posttest (n = 82), followed by cross-sectional studies (n = 50). Oncology, cardiovascular disease and abdominal surgery are the domains with the highest numbers of studies evaluating the impact of CPs. Financial (n = 86), process (n = 76) and clinical indicators (n = 74) are the most frequently reported indicators while service (n = 12) and team indicators (n = 6) are less reported. Conclusions: Based on the relative low number of identified studies compared with the number of CP projects in organisations, we conclude that the CP knowledge is not only found in the literature. We, therefore, argue that (inter)national scientific societies should not only focus on searching and spreading evidence on the content of care but also enhance their knowledge sharing initiatives on the organisation of care processes.
AB - Background: There is evidence that the efficiency and effectiveness of care processes can be improved in all countries. Care pathways (CPs) are proposed as a method to improve the quality of care by reducing variation. During the last decades, CPs have been intensively used in practice. The objective of this study is to examine the study designs for investigating CPs, for which pathologies CPs are used and what the reported indicators to measure the impact of CPs are. Methods: A narrative review of the literature published from 2015 to 2019 was performed. Results: We identified 286 studies, of which 207 evaluated the impact of CPs, 33 were review articles, 29 studies described the development of a CP, 12 were study protocols and 5 opinion papers. The most frequently reported study design for studying the impact of a CP is pre-posttest (n = 82), followed by cross-sectional studies (n = 50). Oncology, cardiovascular disease and abdominal surgery are the domains with the highest numbers of studies evaluating the impact of CPs. Financial (n = 86), process (n = 76) and clinical indicators (n = 74) are the most frequently reported indicators while service (n = 12) and team indicators (n = 6) are less reported. Conclusions: Based on the relative low number of identified studies compared with the number of CP projects in organisations, we conclude that the CP knowledge is not only found in the literature. We, therefore, argue that (inter)national scientific societies should not only focus on searching and spreading evidence on the content of care but also enhance their knowledge sharing initiatives on the organisation of care processes.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85109608905&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/ijcp.14565
DO - 10.1111/ijcp.14565
M3 - Review article
SN - 1368-5031
VL - 75
JO - International Journal of Clinical Practice
JF - International Journal of Clinical Practice
IS - 10
M1 - e14565
ER -