Suppr超能文献

基于医院环境的临床路径和患者相关结局:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Clinical pathways and patient-related outcomes in hospital-based settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

机构信息

Division of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.

Health Professions Research and Development Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy.

出版信息

Acta Biomed. 2021 Feb 9;92(1):e2021093. doi: 10.23750/abm.v92i1.10639.

Abstract

Clinical pathways represent a multi-disciplinary approach to translate clinical practice guidelines into practical interventions. The literature from 2010 onward regarding the efficacy of adopting a clinical pathway on patient-related outcomes within the in-hospital setting has been not synthesized yet. For this reason, this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials aimed to critically synthesize the literature from 2010 onward about the efficacy of clinical pathways, compared with standard of care, on patient-related outcomes in different populations, and to determine the effects of clinical pathways on patient outcomes. We searched PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and reference lists of the included studies. Two independent reviewers screened the 360 identified articles and selected fifteen eligible articles, which were evaluated for content and risk of bias. Eleven studies were finally included. Given the commonalities of the measured outcomes, a meta-analysis including eight studies was performed to evaluate the effect size of the associations between clinical pathways and quality of life (OR=1.472 [0.483-4.486]; p=0.496), and two meta-analyses, including four studies, were performed to evaluate the effect sizes of the associations between clinical pathways with satisfaction (OR=2.226 [0.868-5.708]; p=0.096) and length of stay (OR=0,585 [0.349-0.982]; p=0.042). Reduced length of stay appeared to be associated with clinical pathways, while it remains unclear whether adopting clinical pathways could improve levels of quality of life and satisfaction. More primary research is required to determine in specific populations the efficacy of clinical pathways on patient-related outcomes.

摘要

临床路径代表了一种多学科的方法,旨在将临床实践指南转化为实际干预措施。然而,关于在医院环境中采用临床路径对患者相关结局的有效性的文献,自 2010 年以来尚未得到综合。因此,本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在批判性地综合 2010 年以来关于临床路径与标准护理相比,对不同人群患者相关结局的有效性的文献,并确定临床路径对患者结局的影响。我们检索了 PubMed、Scopus、CINAHL 和纳入研究的参考文献列表。两名独立审查员筛选了 360 篇确定的文章,并选择了 15 篇符合条件的文章,对其内容和偏倚风险进行了评估。最终纳入了 11 项研究。鉴于测量结果的共性,我们进行了一项荟萃分析,包括 8 项研究,以评估临床路径与生活质量之间关联的效应大小(OR=1.472 [0.483-4.486];p=0.496),并进行了两项荟萃分析,包括 4 项研究,以评估临床路径与满意度之间关联的效应大小(OR=2.226 [0.868-5.708];p=0.096)和住院时间(OR=0.585 [0.349-0.982];p=0.042)。住院时间的缩短似乎与临床路径有关,但采用临床路径是否能提高生活质量和满意度水平仍不清楚。需要更多的原始研究来确定在特定人群中,临床路径对患者相关结局的疗效。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e9b0/7975936/2a9bba542122/ACTA-92-93-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验