Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33682818›Full record

SynthesisActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2021

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

Laura Trimarchi, Rosario Caruso, Giorgio Magon, Anna Odone, Cristina Arrigoni

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Visual Modeling Languages in Patient Pathways: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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.

Laura TrimarchiDivision of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. laura.trimarchi@ieo.it.
Rosario CarusoHealth Professions Research and Development Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy. rosario.caruso@grupposandonato.it.
Giorgio MagonNursing office, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. giorgio.magon@ieo.it.
Anna OdoneDepartment of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy. odone.anna@hsr.it.
Cristina ArrigoniDepartment of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy. cristina.arrigoni@unipv.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

Critical PathwaysQuality of LifeHospitalsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID33682818
PMCPMC7975936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.