儿童医院的临床路径计划。

IF 6.2 2区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS
Leigh Anne Bakel, Ilana Y Waynik, Amy J Starmer, Adam K Berkwitt, Sonja I Ziniel
{"title":"儿童医院的临床路径计划。","authors":"Leigh Anne Bakel, Ilana Y Waynik, Amy J Starmer, Adam K Berkwitt, Sonja I Ziniel","doi":"10.1542/peds.2023-065553","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p></p><p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Clinical pathways translate best evidence into the local context of a care setting through structured, multidisciplinary care plans. Little is known about clinical pathway programs in pediatric settings. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of clinical pathway programs and describe similarities and differences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a cross-sectional web survey to assess the existence of a clinical pathway program, number, type, and creation or revision of clinical pathways, and its characteristics in the 111 hospitals of the Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings network.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-one hospitals responded to the survey (73% response rate). Most hospitals had a clinical pathway program (63%, n = 50 of 80) that was hospital-wide (70%, n = 35 of 50). Freestanding children's (48%, n = 39 of 81), academic (60%, n = 43 of 72), teaching hospitals (96%, n = 78 of 81) made up the largest proportion of survey respondents. There was no funding for nearly half of the programs (n = 21 of 46, 46%). Over a quarter of survey respondents reported no data collected to assess pathway utilization and/or care outcomes (n = 19 of 71, 27%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Greater than half of respondents confirmed existence of a program. Freestanding, academic teaching hospitals accounted for the most responses. However, nearly half of surveyed programs were unfunded, and many are unable to measure their pathway outcomes or demonstrate improvement in care. Survey respondents were enthusiastic about participating in a national collaborative on pediatric clinical pathways.</p>","PeriodicalId":20028,"journal":{"name":"Pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical Pathways Programs in Children's Hospitals.\",\"authors\":\"Leigh Anne Bakel, Ilana Y Waynik, Amy J Starmer, Adam K Berkwitt, Sonja I Ziniel\",\"doi\":\"10.1542/peds.2023-065553\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p></p><p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Clinical pathways translate best evidence into the local context of a care setting through structured, multidisciplinary care plans. Little is known about clinical pathway programs in pediatric settings. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of clinical pathway programs and describe similarities and differences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a cross-sectional web survey to assess the existence of a clinical pathway program, number, type, and creation or revision of clinical pathways, and its characteristics in the 111 hospitals of the Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings network.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-one hospitals responded to the survey (73% response rate). Most hospitals had a clinical pathway program (63%, n = 50 of 80) that was hospital-wide (70%, n = 35 of 50). Freestanding children's (48%, n = 39 of 81), academic (60%, n = 43 of 72), teaching hospitals (96%, n = 78 of 81) made up the largest proportion of survey respondents. There was no funding for nearly half of the programs (n = 21 of 46, 46%). Over a quarter of survey respondents reported no data collected to assess pathway utilization and/or care outcomes (n = 19 of 71, 27%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Greater than half of respondents confirmed existence of a program. Freestanding, academic teaching hospitals accounted for the most responses. However, nearly half of surveyed programs were unfunded, and many are unable to measure their pathway outcomes or demonstrate improvement in care. Survey respondents were enthusiastic about participating in a national collaborative on pediatric clinical pathways.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pediatrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2023-065553\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2023-065553","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:临床路径通过结构化的多学科护理计划,将最佳证据转化为当地的护理环境。人们对儿科临床路径计划知之甚少。本研究旨在确定临床路径计划的普遍性,并描述其异同:我们进行了一项横断面网络调查,以评估 "儿科住院研究 "网络的 111 家医院中是否存在临床路径计划、临床路径的数量、类型、创建或修订情况及其特点:81家医院对调查做出了回复(回复率为73%)。大多数医院都有临床路径计划(63%,n = 50,共 80 家),而且是全院性的(70%,n = 35,共 50 家)。独立儿童医院(48%,81 家医院中的 39 家)、学术医院(60%,72 家医院中的 43 家)和教学医院(96%,81 家医院中的 78 家)在调查对象中所占比例最大。近一半的项目(46 项中的 21 项,46%)没有资金支持。超过四分之一的调查对象表示没有收集数据来评估路径利用率和/或护理结果(71 个调查对象中 19 个,占 27%):结论:超过半数的受访者确认已实施了一项计划。独立的学术教学医院占了大多数。然而,近一半的受访项目没有资金支持,许多项目无法衡量其路径成果或证明护理的改善。调查对象对参与全国儿科临床路径合作项目充满热情。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical Pathways Programs in Children's Hospitals.

Background and objective: Clinical pathways translate best evidence into the local context of a care setting through structured, multidisciplinary care plans. Little is known about clinical pathway programs in pediatric settings. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of clinical pathway programs and describe similarities and differences.

Methods: We performed a cross-sectional web survey to assess the existence of a clinical pathway program, number, type, and creation or revision of clinical pathways, and its characteristics in the 111 hospitals of the Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings network.

Results: Eighty-one hospitals responded to the survey (73% response rate). Most hospitals had a clinical pathway program (63%, n = 50 of 80) that was hospital-wide (70%, n = 35 of 50). Freestanding children's (48%, n = 39 of 81), academic (60%, n = 43 of 72), teaching hospitals (96%, n = 78 of 81) made up the largest proportion of survey respondents. There was no funding for nearly half of the programs (n = 21 of 46, 46%). Over a quarter of survey respondents reported no data collected to assess pathway utilization and/or care outcomes (n = 19 of 71, 27%).

Conclusions: Greater than half of respondents confirmed existence of a program. Freestanding, academic teaching hospitals accounted for the most responses. However, nearly half of surveyed programs were unfunded, and many are unable to measure their pathway outcomes or demonstrate improvement in care. Survey respondents were enthusiastic about participating in a national collaborative on pediatric clinical pathways.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pediatrics
Pediatrics 医学-小儿科
CiteScore
12.80
自引率
5.00%
发文量
791
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: The Pediatrics® journal is the official flagship journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). It is widely cited in the field of pediatric medicine and is recognized as the leading journal in the field. The journal publishes original research and evidence-based articles, which provide authoritative information to help readers stay up-to-date with the latest developments in pediatric medicine. The content is peer-reviewed and undergoes rigorous evaluation to ensure its quality and reliability. Pediatrics also serves as a valuable resource for conducting new research studies and supporting education and training activities in the field of pediatrics. It aims to enhance the quality of pediatric outpatient and inpatient care by disseminating valuable knowledge and insights. As of 2023, Pediatrics has an impressive Journal Impact Factor (IF) Score of 8.0. The IF is a measure of a journal's influence and importance in the scientific community, with higher scores indicating a greater impact. This score reflects the significance and reach of the research published in Pediatrics, further establishing its prominence in the field of pediatric medicine.
×
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