Cargando…

The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: Room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this article is to report on the quality of the existing evidence base regarding the effectiveness of clinical pathway (CPW) research in the hospital setting. The analysis is based on a recently published Cochrane review of the effectiveness of CPWs. METHODS: An integral c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rotter, Thomas, Kinsman, Leigh, James, Erica, Machotta, Andreas, Steyerberg, Ewout W
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3424110/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22709274
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-80
_version_ 1782241176405934080
author Rotter, Thomas
Kinsman, Leigh
James, Erica
Machotta, Andreas
Steyerberg, Ewout W
author_facet Rotter, Thomas
Kinsman, Leigh
James, Erica
Machotta, Andreas
Steyerberg, Ewout W
author_sort Rotter, Thomas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The purpose of this article is to report on the quality of the existing evidence base regarding the effectiveness of clinical pathway (CPW) research in the hospital setting. The analysis is based on a recently published Cochrane review of the effectiveness of CPWs. METHODS: An integral component of the review process was a rigorous appraisal of the methodological quality of published CPW evaluations. This allowed the identification of strengths and limitations of the evidence base for CPW effectiveness. We followed the validated Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) criteria for randomized and non-randomized clinical pathway evaluations. In addition, we tested the hypotheses that simple pre-post studies tend to overestimate CPW effects reported. RESULTS: Out of the 260 primary studies meeting CPW content criteria, only 27 studies met the EPOC study design criteria, with the majority of CPW studies (more than 70 %) excluded from the review on the basis that they were simple pre-post evaluations, mostly comparing two or more annual patient cohorts. Methodologically poor study designs are often used to evaluate CPWs and this compromises the quality of the existing evidence base. CONCLUSIONS: Cochrane EPOC methodological criteria, including the selection of rigorous study designs along with detailed descriptions of CPW development and implementation processes, are recommended for quantitative evaluations to improve the evidence base for the use of CPWs in hospitals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3424110
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34241102012-08-22 The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: Room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials Rotter, Thomas Kinsman, Leigh James, Erica Machotta, Andreas Steyerberg, Ewout W BMC Med Res Methodol Correspondence BACKGROUND: The purpose of this article is to report on the quality of the existing evidence base regarding the effectiveness of clinical pathway (CPW) research in the hospital setting. The analysis is based on a recently published Cochrane review of the effectiveness of CPWs. METHODS: An integral component of the review process was a rigorous appraisal of the methodological quality of published CPW evaluations. This allowed the identification of strengths and limitations of the evidence base for CPW effectiveness. We followed the validated Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) criteria for randomized and non-randomized clinical pathway evaluations. In addition, we tested the hypotheses that simple pre-post studies tend to overestimate CPW effects reported. RESULTS: Out of the 260 primary studies meeting CPW content criteria, only 27 studies met the EPOC study design criteria, with the majority of CPW studies (more than 70 %) excluded from the review on the basis that they were simple pre-post evaluations, mostly comparing two or more annual patient cohorts. Methodologically poor study designs are often used to evaluate CPWs and this compromises the quality of the existing evidence base. CONCLUSIONS: Cochrane EPOC methodological criteria, including the selection of rigorous study designs along with detailed descriptions of CPW development and implementation processes, are recommended for quantitative evaluations to improve the evidence base for the use of CPWs in hospitals. BioMed Central 2012-06-18 /pmc/articles/PMC3424110/ /pubmed/22709274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-80 Text en Copyright ©2012 Rotter et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Correspondence
Rotter, Thomas
Kinsman, Leigh
James, Erica
Machotta, Andreas
Steyerberg, Ewout W
The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: Room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials
title The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: Room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials
title_full The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: Room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials
title_fullStr The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: Room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials
title_full_unstemmed The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: Room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials
title_short The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: Room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials
title_sort quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials
topic Correspondence
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3424110/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22709274
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-80
work_keys_str_mv AT rotterthomas thequalityoftheevidencebaseforclinicalpathwayeffectivenessroomforimprovementinthedesignofevaluationtrials
AT kinsmanleigh thequalityoftheevidencebaseforclinicalpathwayeffectivenessroomforimprovementinthedesignofevaluationtrials
AT jameserica thequalityoftheevidencebaseforclinicalpathwayeffectivenessroomforimprovementinthedesignofevaluationtrials
AT machottaandreas thequalityoftheevidencebaseforclinicalpathwayeffectivenessroomforimprovementinthedesignofevaluationtrials
AT steyerbergewoutw thequalityoftheevidencebaseforclinicalpathwayeffectivenessroomforimprovementinthedesignofevaluationtrials
AT rotterthomas qualityoftheevidencebaseforclinicalpathwayeffectivenessroomforimprovementinthedesignofevaluationtrials
AT kinsmanleigh qualityoftheevidencebaseforclinicalpathwayeffectivenessroomforimprovementinthedesignofevaluationtrials
AT jameserica qualityoftheevidencebaseforclinicalpathwayeffectivenessroomforimprovementinthedesignofevaluationtrials
AT machottaandreas qualityoftheevidencebaseforclinicalpathwayeffectivenessroomforimprovementinthedesignofevaluationtrials
AT steyerbergewoutw qualityoftheevidencebaseforclinicalpathwayeffectivenessroomforimprovementinthedesignofevaluationtrials