The Use of Clinical Pathways in Emergency Departments: A Scoping Review.

IF 2.4 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Health Services Insights Pub Date : 2025-05-07 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/11786329251328527
Innocent Tawanda Mudzingwa, Sarah Jane Prior, Phoebe Griffin, Emma Tavender, Viet Tran
{"title":"The Use of Clinical Pathways in Emergency Departments: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Innocent Tawanda Mudzingwa, Sarah Jane Prior, Phoebe Griffin, Emma Tavender, Viet Tran","doi":"10.1177/11786329251328527","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Clinical pathways (CPWs) are evidence-based, standardised, clinical management plans that are designed to deliver a sequence of clinical interventions to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of healthcare. The aim of this study was to identify and summarise the current available evidence on the use of CPWs in emergency departments (EDs).</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A literature search was conducted in Scopus, Embase, Emcare, and PubMed academic databases. The search strategy was guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework and results reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist. Studies were included if they reported empirical data either qualitatively or quantitatively, studied the use of CPW practices, and reported on the use of at least one CPW activity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-four articles were eligible for the scoping review. Variation and quality of treatment, resource utilisation and time to treatment were identified as the three main patient and organisational outcomes from the use of CPWs. Three main categories of barriers to use were identified: Organisational environment factors, Healthcare professional-related factors, and CPW operational issues.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CPW implementation has wide positive patient and organisational outcomes in the ED. Whilst no single strategy would result in implementing CPWs in the ED settings successfully, broad engagement with clinicians of all disciplines who use the pathways and involvement of multidisciplinary teams in implementation is vital to increase visibility of the CPW.</p>","PeriodicalId":12876,"journal":{"name":"Health Services Insights","volume":"18 ","pages":"11786329251328527"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12062697/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services Insights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11786329251328527","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Clinical pathways (CPWs) are evidence-based, standardised, clinical management plans that are designed to deliver a sequence of clinical interventions to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of healthcare. The aim of this study was to identify and summarise the current available evidence on the use of CPWs in emergency departments (EDs).

Study design: A literature search was conducted in Scopus, Embase, Emcare, and PubMed academic databases. The search strategy was guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework and results reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist. Studies were included if they reported empirical data either qualitatively or quantitatively, studied the use of CPW practices, and reported on the use of at least one CPW activity.

Results: Sixty-four articles were eligible for the scoping review. Variation and quality of treatment, resource utilisation and time to treatment were identified as the three main patient and organisational outcomes from the use of CPWs. Three main categories of barriers to use were identified: Organisational environment factors, Healthcare professional-related factors, and CPW operational issues.

Conclusions: CPW implementation has wide positive patient and organisational outcomes in the ED. Whilst no single strategy would result in implementing CPWs in the ED settings successfully, broad engagement with clinicians of all disciplines who use the pathways and involvement of multidisciplinary teams in implementation is vital to increase visibility of the CPW.

临床路径在急诊科的应用:范围综述
临床路径(cpw)是基于证据的、标准化的临床管理计划,旨在提供一系列临床干预措施,以提高医疗保健的效率和有效性。本研究的目的是确定和总结目前在急诊科(ed)使用CPWs的现有证据。研究设计:在Scopus、Embase、Emcare和PubMed学术数据库中进行文献检索。搜索策略以Arksey和O'Malley的框架为指导,并根据系统评价的首选报告项目和范围评价的元分析扩展清单报告结果。如果研究报告了定性或定量的经验数据,研究了CPW实践的使用,并报告了至少一种CPW活动的使用,则将其纳入研究。结果:64篇文章符合纳入范围审查。治疗的变化和质量、资源利用和治疗时间被确定为使用CPWs的三个主要患者和组织结果。确定了使用障碍的三个主要类别:组织环境因素、医疗保健专业人员相关因素和CPW操作问题。结论:CPW的实施对急诊科的患者和组织产生了广泛的积极影响。虽然没有单一的策略可以成功地在急诊科环境中实施CPW,但与使用这些途径的所有学科的临床医生广泛接触,并让多学科团队参与实施,对于提高CPW的可见度至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health Services Insights
Health Services Insights HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信