Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30794311›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2019

A systematic review of the effects of implementing clinical pathways supported by health information technologies.

Matthew T Neame, Jerry Chacko, Anna E Surace, Ian P Sinha, Daniel B Hawcutt

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Visual Modeling Languages in Patient Pathways: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Pediatric acute asthma scoring systems: a systematic review and survey of UK practice.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Advancing biomedical and health informatics knowledge through reviews of existing research.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019
    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

5 authors.

Matthew T NeameGlobal Digital Exemplar Programme, Alder Hey Children's Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Jerry ChackoDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Anna E SuraceDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Ian P SinhaGlobal Digital Exemplar Programme, Alder Hey Children's Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Daniel B HawcuttDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveHealth information technology (HIT) interventions include electronic patient records, prescribing, and ordering systems. Clinical pathways are multidisciplinary plans of care that enable the delivery of evidence-based healthcare. Our objective was to systematically review the effects of implementing HIT-supported clinical pathways. MATERIALS AND

methodsA systematic review protocol was developed including Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL database searches. We recorded data relating to study design, participants, intervention, and outcome characteristics and formally assessed risk of bias.

resultsForty-four studies involving more than 270 000 patients were included. Investigation methodologies included before-after (n = 16, 36.4%), noncomparative (n = 14, 31.8%), interrupted time series (n = 5, 11.4%), retrospective cohort (n = 4, 9.1%), cluster randomized (n = 2, 4.5%), controlled before-after (n = 1, 2.3%), prospective case-control (n = 1, 2.3%), and prospective cohort (n = 1, 2.3%) study designs. Clinical decision support (n = 25, 56.8%), modified electronic documentation (n = 23, 52.3%), and computerized provider order entry (n = 23, 52.3%) were the most frequently utilized HIT interventions. The majority of studies (n = 38, 86.4%) reported benefits associated with HIT-supported pathways. These included reported improvements in objectively measured patient outcomes (n = 15, 34.1%), quality of care (n = 29, 65.9%), and healthcare resource utilization (n = 10, n = 22.7%). DISCUSSION: Although most studies reported improvements in outcomes, the strength of evidence was limited by the study designs that were utilized.

conclusionsOngoing evaluations of HIT-supported clinical pathways are justified but would benefit from study designs that report key outcomes (including adverse events) and minimize the risk of bias.

Indexed as

Critical PathwaysDecision Support Systems, ClinicalMedical Informatics ApplicationsMedical Order Entry SystemsElectronic Health RecordsHumanscritical pathwaysevidence-based medicinemedical informatics

Identifiers

PMID30794311
PMCPMC7647175

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.