OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the implementation of a clinical pathway for stroke patients. METHODS: We performed a controlled intervention study without random allocation that compared two non-concomitant cohorts of stroke patients corresponding to the periods immediately before (control group) and after (intervention group) the implementation of a clinical pathway. The main outcome measures were: a) quality of care indicators; b) improvements in functional capacity (Barthel score) and neurological function (Canadian scale); c) nosocomial complications; d) satisfaction, and e) mean length of hospital stay. RESULTS:One hundred and thirty-nine patients were recruited. Sixty-nine corresponded to the period before implementation of the pathway and 70 corresponded to the period after implementation. There were no significant differences between the two groups on admission. A 36.5% reduction in the time from admission to mobilization was observed. No significant differences were observed between the groups for the other quality of care indicators, or in improvements in functional and neurological capacity. Nosocomial complications occurred in 44.5% of patients in the control group compared with 28.6% in the intervention group (p = .039). No significant differences were observed in the overall satisfaction assessment, but patients in the intervention group showed greater satisfaction in the dimensions of "information" and "trust and professionalism". The mean length of hospital stay was reduced from 11 to 10 days. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of the stroke clinical pathway contributed to reducing the length of hospital stay and the number of inpatient complications, as well as to improving some quality of care indicators.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the implementation of a clinical pathway for strokepatients. METHODS: We performed a controlled intervention study without random allocation that compared two non-concomitant cohorts of strokepatients corresponding to the periods immediately before (control group) and after (intervention group) the implementation of a clinical pathway. The main outcome measures were: a) quality of care indicators; b) improvements in functional capacity (Barthel score) and neurological function (Canadian scale); c) nosocomial complications; d) satisfaction, and e) mean length of hospital stay. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-nine patients were recruited. Sixty-nine corresponded to the period before implementation of the pathway and 70 corresponded to the period after implementation. There were no significant differences between the two groups on admission. A 36.5% reduction in the time from admission to mobilization was observed. No significant differences were observed between the groups for the other quality of care indicators, or in improvements in functional and neurological capacity. Nosocomial complications occurred in 44.5% of patients in the control group compared with 28.6% in the intervention group (p = .039). No significant differences were observed in the overall satisfaction assessment, but patients in the intervention group showed greater satisfaction in the dimensions of "information" and "trust and professionalism". The mean length of hospital stay was reduced from 11 to 10 days. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of the stroke clinical pathway contributed to reducing the length of hospital stay and the number of inpatient complications, as well as to improving some quality of care indicators.
Authors: Felipe J Aidar; Ricardo J de Oliveira; António J Silva; Dihogo G de Matos; André L Carneiro; Nuno Garrido; Robert C Hickner; Victor M Reis Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2011-10-13 Impact factor: 3.186