Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15495038›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2004

In-hospital care pathways for stroke.

J Kwan, P Sandercock

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. End-of-life care pathways for improving outcomes in caring for the dying.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  4. Discharge planning from hospital.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  5. Clinical pathways for chronic cough in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. How to practice person-centred care: A conceptual framework.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

J KwanUniversity Department of Geriatric Medicine, University of Southampton, Level E (807), Southampton General Hospital, Tremona Road, Southampton, HANTS, UK, SO16 6YD. jk@1to1.org
P Sandercock

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStroke care pathways have the potential to promote organised and efficient patient care that is based on best evidence and guidelines, but evidence to support their use is unclear.

objectivesWe aimed to assess the effects of care pathways, compared with standard medical care, among patients with acute stroke who had been admitted to hospital. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched in June 2003), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2003), MEDLINE (1975 to June 2003), EMBASE (1980 to June 2003), CINAHL (1982 to June 2003), ISI Proceedings: Science & Technology (1990 to November 2003), and HealthSTAR (1994 to May 2001). We also handsearched the Journal of Integrated Care Pathways (2001 to 2003), formerly Journal of Managed Care (1997 to 1998) and Journal of Integrated Care (1998 to 2001). Reference lists of articles were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies that compared care pathway care with standard medical care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One reviewer selected studies for inclusion and the other independently checked the decisions. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of the studies. One reviewer extracted the data and the other checked the extracted data. MAIN

resultsThree randomised controlled trials (340 patients) and 12 non-randomised studies (4081 patients) were included. There was significant statistical heterogeneity in the analysis of many of the outcomes. We found no significant difference between care pathway and control groups in terms of death or discharge destination. Patients managed with a care pathway were: (a) more dependent at discharge (P = 0.04); (b) less likely to suffer a urinary tract infection (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.51, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.34 to 0.79); (c) less likely to be readmitted (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.39); and (d) more likely to have neuroimaging (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.25). Evidence from randomised trials suggested that patient satisfaction and quality of life were significantly lower in the care pathway group (P = 0.02 and P < 0.005 respectively). REVIEWERS'

conclusionsUse of stroke care pathways may be associated with positive and negative effects. Since most of the results have been derived from non-randomised studies, they are likely to be influenced by potential biases and confounding factors. There is currently insufficient supporting evidence to justify the routine implementation of care pathways for acute stroke management or stroke rehabilitation.

Indexed as

Critical PathwaysHospitalizationHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStrokeTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID15495038
PMCPMC7003611

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.