Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17986361›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2007

A cluster randomized controlled trial of a clinical pathway for hospital treatment of heart failure: study design and population.

Massimiliano Panella, Sara Marchisio, Andrea Gardini, Francesco Di Stanislao

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00519038 (Experimental Prospective Study on the Effectiveness and Efficiency of the Implementation of Clinical Pathways), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT00519038 nacompletednot on this map

Experimental Prospective Study on the Effectiveness and Efficiency of the Implementation of Clinical Pathways

TypeinterventionalSponsorAgenzia Regionale Sanitaria delle MarcheRan2003 to 2006Enrolled424ConditionsCongestive Heart FailureArmsClinical Pathways, Usual Care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Massimiliano PanellaDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Eastern Piedmont A, Avogadro, Novara, Italy. panella@med.unipmn.it
Sara Marchisio
Andrea Gardini
Francesco Di Stanislao

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe hospital treatment of heart failure frequently does not follow published guidelines, potentially contributing to the high morbidity, mortality and economic cost of this disorder. Consequently the development of clinical pathways has the potential to reduce the current variability in care, enhance guideline adherence, and improve outcomes for patients. Despite enthusiasm and diffusion, the widespread acceptance of clinical pathways remain questionable because very little prospective controlled data demonstrated their effectiveness. The Experimental Prospective Study on the Effectiveness and Efficiency of the Implementation of Clinical Pathways was designed in order to conduct a rigorous evaluation of clinical pathways in hospital treatment of acute heart failure. The primary objective of the trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of clinical pathways for hospital treatment of heart failure in Italian hospitals. METHODS/

designTwo-arm, cluster-randomized trial. 14 community hospitals were randomized either to arm 1 (clinical pathway: appropriate use of practice guidelines and supplies of drugs and ancillary services, new organization and procedures, patient education, etc.) or to arm 2 (no intervention, usual care). 424 patients sample (212 in each group), 80% of power at the 5% significance level (two-sided). The primary outcome measure is in-hospital mortality. We will also analyze the impact of the clinical pathways comparing the length and the appropriateness of the stay, the rate of unscheduled readmissions, the customers' satisfaction and the costs treating the patients with the pathways and with the current practice along all the observation period. The quality of the care will be assessed by monitoring the use of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures during hospital stay and by measuring key quality indicators at discharge. DISCUSSION: This paper examines the design of the evaluation of a complex intervention. Since clinical pathways are made up of various interconnecting parts we have chosen the cluster-randomized controlled trial because is widely accepted as the most reliable method of determining effectiveness when measuring cost-effectiveness in real practice.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID [NCT00519038].

Indexed as

Critical PathwaysOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overCluster AnalysisComorbidityEfficiency, OrganizationalFemaleGuideline AdherenceHeart FailureHospital MortalityHospitals, CommunityHumansItalyMalePatient Readmission

Identifiers

PMID17986361
PMCPMC2204000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.