ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics2017
Role of clinical pathway in improving the quality of care for patients with faecal incontinence: A randomised trial.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Clinical pathways for secondary care and the effects on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of stay and hospital costs.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical pathways and patient-related outcomes in hospital-based settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2021Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess the development and implementation of the Integrated Rapid Assessment and Treatment (IRAT) pathway for the management of patients with fecal incontinence and measure its impact on patients' care.
methodsPatients referred to the colorectal unit in our hospital for the management of faecal incontinence were randomised to either the Standard Care pathway or the newly developed IRAT pathway in this feasibility study. The IRAT pathway is designed to provide a seamless multidisciplinary care to patients with faecal incontinence in a timely fashion. On the other hand, patients in the Standard Pathway were managed in the general colorectal clinic. Percentage improvements in St. Marks Incontinence Score, Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score and Rockwood Faecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale after completion of treatment in both groups were the primary outcome measures. Secondary endpoints were the time required to complete the management and patients' satisfaction score. χ
resultsThirty-nine patients, 34 females, consented to participate. Thirty-one (79.5%) patients completed the final assessment and were included in the outcome analysis. There was no significant difference in the quality of life scales and incontinence scores. Patients in the IRAT pathway were more satisfied with the time required to complete management (
conclusionDespite of the lack of significant difference in outcome measures, the new pathway has positively influenced patient's mindset, which was reflected in a higher satisfaction score.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.