28.01.2015 Views

Evidence Report/Technology Assessment Number 43 - Making ...

Evidence Report/Technology Assessment Number 43 - Making ...

Evidence Report/Technology Assessment Number 43 - Making ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Table 52.1. Key features of studies of critical pathways<br />

Study Setting<br />

Design,<br />

Outcomes<br />

Children with an asthma<br />

Level 1,<br />

exacerbation admitted to an<br />

Level 1<br />

academic medical center: patients<br />

randomized to pathway group or<br />

usual care group 22<br />

Patients undergoing hip or knee Level 1,<br />

replacement surgery at an academic<br />

Level 1<br />

medical center in Australia: patients<br />

randomized to pathway group or<br />

usual care group 21<br />

Patients being treated for hip fracture Level 1,<br />

at an academic medical center in<br />

Australia 20 Level 2<br />

Patients presenting to the emergency Level 1,<br />

department with pneumonia at 19<br />

Level 1<br />

medical centers across Canada:<br />

hospitals were randomized to<br />

pathway group or usual care group 23<br />

Patients in need of supplemental Level 2,<br />

oxygen therapy: prospective beforeafter<br />

analysis with washout period 26 Level 1<br />

Patients undergoing unilateral neck Level 2,<br />

dissection at an academic medical<br />

Level 1<br />

center: pathway group compared to<br />

historical controls and nonrandomized<br />

concurrent controls 25<br />

Patients admitted to a community Level 2,<br />

teaching hospital for the treatment of<br />

Level 1<br />

an asthma exacerbation: pathway<br />

group compared to historical controls<br />

and non-randomized concurrent<br />

controls 24<br />

Patients undergoing one of several Level 2,<br />

defined surgical procedures over a<br />

Level 2<br />

seven year period at an academic<br />

medical center: pathway group<br />

compared to historical controls as<br />

well as to patients from other similar<br />

hospitals in the same region 27<br />

Clinical Outcomes<br />

(p value)<br />

Shorter duration of<br />

intensive nebulizer<br />

treatment (0.02), length<br />

of stay (0.01)<br />

Shorter length of stay<br />

(0.011) and time to<br />

mobilization (0.001) and<br />

ambulation (0.02)<br />

Shorter length of stay<br />

(0.03)<br />

Lower rates of bed-days<br />

per patient (0.04),<br />

shorter length of stay<br />

(0.01) and shorter<br />

duration of IV therapy<br />

(0.01)<br />

More frequent<br />

appropriate oxygen<br />

discontinuation orders<br />

(0.001)<br />

Length of stay decreased<br />

compared to historical<br />

controls (0.001) but not<br />

concurrent controls<br />

More appropriate<br />

antibiotic use and<br />

conversion to nebulizer<br />

treatment (0.002 for<br />

historical controls, 0.05<br />

for concurrent controls)<br />

Decreased lengths of<br />

stay for the pathway<br />

group compared to the<br />

historical controls, but<br />

not compared to the<br />

concurrent control group<br />

Non-Clinical<br />

Outcomes (p value)<br />

Lower room charges<br />

(0.001) and therapy<br />

charges (0.001)<br />

Increased costs (0.02)<br />

Total costs decreased<br />

compared to historical<br />

controls (0.001) but<br />

not concurrent<br />

controls<br />

585

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!