Cited by 128Clinical practice guidelines implementationEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryHealthcare Quality and Management

Critical Pathway Effectiveness: Assessing the Impact of Patient, Hospital Care, and Pathway Characteristics Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis

Open access
Dy, Sydney M., Garg, Pushkal, Nyberg, Dorothy, Dawson, Patricia B., Pronovost, Peter J., Morlock, Laura, Rubin, Haya, Wu, Albert W.·2005·Health Services Research

Abstract

Objective. To qualitatively describe patient, hospital care, and critical pathway characteristics that may be associated with pathway effectiveness in reducing length of stay. Data Sources/Study Setting. Administrative data and review of pathway documentation and a sample of medical records for each of 26 surgical critical pathways in a tertiary care center's department of surgery, 1988–1998. Study Design. Retrospective qualitative study. Data Collection/Abstraction Methods. Using information from a literature review and consultation with experts, we developed a list of characteristics that might impact critical pathway effectiveness. We used hypothesis‐driven qualitative comparative analysis to describe key primary and secondary characteristics that might differentiate effective from ineffective critical pathways. Principal Findings. All 7 of the 26 pathways associated with a reduced length of stay had at least one of the following characteristics: (1) no preexisting trend toward lower length of stay for the procedure (71 percent), and/or (2) it was the first pathway implemented in its surgical service (71 percent). In addition, pathways effective in reducing length of stay tended to be for procedures with lower patient severity of illness, as indicated by fewer intensive care days and lower mortality. Effective pathways tended to be used more frequently than ineffective pathways (77 versus 59 percent of medical records with pathway documents present), but high rates of documented pathway use were not necessary for pathway effectiveness. Conclusions. Critical pathway programs may have limited effectiveness, and may be effective only in certain situations. Because pathway utilization was not a strong predictor of pathway effectiveness, the mechanism by which critical pathways may reduce length of stay is unclear.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.0r370.x

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Conner, D., W. Rifkin, A. Silver, B. Flansbaum, and D. Rose. 2000. ''Critical Pathways: How Strong Is the Literature Supporting Their Use?'' Journal of General Internal Medicine 15 (suppl. 1): 106.
  2. Goldstein, R. 1991. Phi Coefficient (Fourfold Correlation). The Stata Technical Bulletin Re- Prints, pp. 158-9. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation.
  3. Health Services Cost Review Commission. 2002. ''About HSCRC.'' Available at http://www.hscrc.state.md.us/about_us/about_us.htm [accessed December 21, 2004].
  4. Pearson, S. D. 1998. Critical Pathways and Feedback to Improve Quality, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Report No. 99-41. Boston: Brigham and Women's Hospital.
  5. Sloan, F. A., and J. Valvona. 1986. ''Why Has Hospital Length of Stay Declined?'' Social Science Medicine 22 (1): 63-73.
  6. StataCorp. 1999. Ksm--Smoothing Including Lowess. Stata Statistical Software: Release 6.0, pp. 152-6. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation.
  7. Thomson O'Brien, M. A., A. D. Oxman, R. B. Haynes, D. A. Davis, N. Freemantle, and E. L. Harvey. 2000. ''Local Opinion Leaders: Effects on Professional Practice and Health Care Outcomes.'' Cochrane Database Systematic Review (2), CD000125.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dy, S. M., Garg, P., Nyberg, D., Dawson, P. B., Pronovost, P. J., Morlock, L., Rubin, H., & Wu, A. W.
Affiliations
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Dy, Sydney M.
Venue
Health Services Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-03-10
Volume
40
Issue
2
Pages
499-516
ISSN
  • 0017-9124 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-6773
OpenAlex
W3196469957
Cited by
128
References
26
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
9.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Enhanced Recovery After Surgery
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
Keywords
care pathways, surgical care, length of hospital stay, mortality, pathway implementation
MeSH terms
Health Services Research, Hospitals, University, Humans, Length of Stay, Medical Audit, Postoperative Care, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Retrospective Studies, Severity of Illness Index, Surgery Department, Hospital, Surgical Procedures, Operative, Baltimore, Cohort Studies, Treatment Outcome, Critical Pathways, Quality Indicators, Health Care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review