Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40365866›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2025

Clinical pathways for secondary care and the effects on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of stay and hospital costs.

Thomas Rotter, Leigh D Kinsman, Agnès Alsius, Shannon D Scott, Adegboyega Lawal, Ulrich Ronellenfitsch, Christopher Plishka, Gary Groot, Phil Woods, Chloe Coulson and 5 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The intent is good but… exploring barriers and enablers to clinical pathway use in regional Australian Emergency Departments.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Urinary tract infections in children.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Thomas RotterHealthcare Quality Programs, School of Nursing, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Leigh D KinsmanViolet Vines Marshman Centre for Rural Health Research, La Trobe University Rural Health School, Bendigo, Australia.
Agnès AlsiusSchool of Nursing, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.
Shannon D ScottFaculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Adegboyega LawalCollege of Pharmacy and Nutrition, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Ulrich RonellenfitschDepartment of Visceral, Vascular and Endocrine Surgery, Medical Faculty of the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg and University Hospital Halle (Saale), Halle (Saale), Germany.
Christopher PlishkaCollege of Pharmacy and Nutrition, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Gary GrootCollege of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Phil WoodsCollege of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Chloe CoulsonSchool of Nursing, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.
Leigh Anne BakelDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Colorado School of Medicine and Children's Hospital Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
Kim SearsQueen's Collaboration for Health Care Quality: a JBI Centre of Excellence, School of Nursing, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Amanda Ross-WhiteBracken Health Sciences Library, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.
Andreas MachottaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Sophia Children's Hospital, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Timothy J SchultzFlinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University, Bedford Park, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical pathways (CPWs) are structured multidisciplinary care plans. They aim to translate evidence into practice and optimize clinical outcomes. This is the first update of the previous systematic review.

objectivesTo investigate the effect of CPWs on patient outcomes, length of stay, costs and charges, adherence to recommended practice, and to measure the impact of different approaches to implementation of CPWs. SEARCH

methodsFor this update, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched on 25 July 2024. Two trial registries were searched on 26 July 2024, along with reference checking, citation searching and contacting authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered two groups of participants: health professionals involved in CPW utilization, including (but not limited to) physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, pharmacists, occupational therapists and social workers; and patients managed using a CPW. We included randomized trials, non-randomized trials, controlled before-after (CBA) studies, and interrupted time-series (ITS) studies comparing (1) stand-alone clinical pathways with usual care, and (2) clinical pathways as part of a multifaceted intervention with usual care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened all titles, abstracts and full-text manuscripts to assess eligibility and the methodological quality of included studies using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care 'Risk of Bias' tool. Certainty of evidence was assessed by two authors independently. Interventions were scored as 'high', 'moderate' or 'low' for the evidence-based implementation process. MAIN

resultsThe update provided 31 additional studies for a total of 58 included studies (24,841 patients and 2027 healthcare professionals). Forty-one (71%) were randomized trials, four (7%) non-randomized trials, four (7%) CBA studies and nine (16%) ITS studies. Forty-nine studies compared stand-alone CPWs to usual care and nine compared multifaceted interventions including a CPW to usual care. Collectively, the risk of bias was high due to potential contamination by healthcare professionals, lack of blinding of patients and personnel, lack of allocation concealment and selective reporting in ITS studies. Stand-alone clinical pathway interventions It is uncertain whether stand-alone CPWs reduce inhospital mortality (13% v 16%: OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.20; P = 0.27; I² = 65%; 7 randomized trials; n = 4603; low-certainty evidence due to serious imprecision and inconsistency) or mortality (up to 6 months) (4% v 3%: OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.60; P = 0.34; I² = 20%; 3 randomized trials, n = 805; low-certainty evidence due to serious risk of bias and imprecision). Stand-alone CPWs likely reduce inhospital complications (10% v 17%: OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.80; P = 0.001; I² = 52%; 11 randomized trials, n = 3668; moderate-certainty evidence due to serious risk of bias). It is very uncertain whether stand-alone CPWs reduce hospital readmissions (up to 6 months) (9% v 13%: OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.03; P = 0.07; I² = 11%; 9 randomized trials, n = 1578; very low-certainty evidence due to serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision). Stand-alone CPWs likely reduce the length of hospital stay compared to usual care (MD -1.12 days, 95% CI -1.60 to -0.65; P < 0.00001; I² = 64%; 21 studies; n = 5201; moderate-certainty evidence due to serious inconsistency). Costs and charges were generally lower in CPWs as indicated by negative MDs in nine studies (10 studies, n = 2113, data not pooled; very low-certainty evidence due to serious indirectness and very serious inconsistency). Stand-alone CPWs may slightly increase adherence to recommended practice compared with usual care (3 randomized studies, n = 573; data not pooled; low-certainty evidence due to serious risk of bias and serious inconsistency). Multifaceted clinical pathway interventions It is uncertain whether multifaceted CPWs reduce inhospital mortality (2 randomized studies, n = 6304, data not pooled; low-certainty evidence due to very serious inconsistency). Multifaceted CPWs may make little or no difference to mortality (up to 6 months) (9% v 8%: OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.25; P = 0.61; I² = 0%; 3 randomized studies; n = 6531; low-certainty evidence due to serious imprecision and serious risk of bias). It is uncertain whether multifaceted CPWs reduce inhospital complications (9% v 23%: OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.87; 1 study, n = 140; low-certainty evidence due to very serious imprecision). It is uncertain whether multifaceted CPWs reduce hospital readmission (up to 6 months) (2 randomized studies, n =1569, data not pooled; low-certainty evidence due to very serious inconsistency), or length of stay (4 randomized studies, n = 1936, data not pooled; low-certainty evidence due to very serious inconsistency), or hospital costs and charges (4 randomized studies, n = 2015, data not pooled; very low-certainty evidence due to very serious imprecision and serious indirectness in outcome measures). It is uncertain whether multifaceted CPWs increase adherence to recommended practice (2 randomized studies, n = 6304, data not pooled, low-certainty evidence due to very serious inconsistency). Key study characteristics The highest proportion of included studies were from the USA (36%), followed by Australia (10%), China (10%), Japan (5%), the UK (5%), Canada (5%), Italy (5%), and Germany (5%). More than half of the included studies tested CPW in general acute wards (53%), followed by emergency departments (17%), intensive care (14%), and extended-stay facilities (10%). The most common clinical conditions were asthma (16%), stroke (10%), mechanical ventilation (9%) and myocardial infarction (7%). AUTHORS'

conclusionsStand-alone CPWs are likely to reduce inhospital complications and length of hospital stay and may slightly increase adherence to recommended practice. There was little conclusive evidence for multifaceted CPWs due to mixed results from a limited number of included studies. It is uncertain whether stand-alone CPWs or CPWs, as part of a multifaceted approach, reduce inhospital mortality, mortality (up to 6 months), hospital readmission (up to 6 months) or costs and charges.

Indexed as

Critical PathwaysHospital CostsLength of StayProfessional PracticeSecondary Health CareBiasControlled Before-After StudiesHumansInterrupted Time Series AnalysisNon-Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID40365866
PMCPMC12076547

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.