Impact of guidelines implemented in a paris university hospital: application to the use of antiemetics by cancer patients

Clinical pathways: effects on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of stay and hospital costs

BACKGROUND

Clinical pathways are structured multidisciplinary care plans used by health services to detail essential steps in the care of patients with a specific clinical problem. They aim to link evidence to practice and optimise clinical outcomes whilst maximising clinical efficiency.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of clinical pathways on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of stay and hospital costs.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE), the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and bibliographic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, NHS EED and Global Health. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles and contacted relevant professional organisations.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series studies comparing stand alone clinical pathways with usual care as well as clinical pathways as part of a multifaceted intervention with usual care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all titles to assess eligibility and methodological quality. Studies were grouped into those comparing clinical pathways with usual care and those comparing clinical pathways as part of a multifaceted intervention with usual care.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies involving 11,398 participants met the eligibility and study quality criteria for inclusion. Twenty studies compared stand alone clinical pathways with usual care. These studies indicated a reduction in in-hospital complications (odds ratio (OR) 0.58; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.94) and improved documentation (OR 13.65: 95%CI 5.38 to 34.64). There was no evidence of differences in readmission to hospital or in-hospital mortality. Length of stay was the most commonly employed outcome measure with most studies reporting significant reductions. A decrease in hospital costs/ charges was also observed, ranging from WMD +261 US$ favouring usual care to WMD -4919 US$ favouring clinical pathways (in US$ dollar standardized to the year 2000). Considerable heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis of length of stay and hospital cost results. An assessment of whether lower hospital costs contributed to cost shifting to another health sector was not undertaken.Seven studies compared clinical pathways as part of a multifaceted intervention with usual care. No evidence of differences were found between intervention and control groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Clinical pathways are associated with reduced in-hospital complications and improved documentation without negatively impacting on length of stay and hospital costs.

[Evaluation of clinical practice in pulmonary oncology: a review of the literature]

INTRODUCTION

Evaluation of clinical practice in pulmonary oncology aims to improve both the quality of care and the control of costs.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

A Medline search of the literature allowed analysis of the published studies of the evaluation of clinical practice. They showed that though 82-95% of patients with small cell bronchial carcinoma were treated with a combination of etoposide and cisplatin, less than half of the patients with non-small cell cancer received treatment.

VIEWPOINT

Various factors such as age, comorbidity, race, socio-economic status and gender affect the treatment decisions. There is also a discrepancy between the trial data and clinical practice that could be explained by two factors. On one hand advances are not always adopted by doctors and on the other hand the patient populations treated may sometimes be different from those in the trials.

CONCLUSION

Though the number of published studies is still low an increase is to be expected on account of the publication of new regulations concerning the evaluation of clinical practice and the appropriate use of drugs.

Prophylaxis of acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children with cancer: what is the evidence?

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting are preventable side effects of cancer chemotherapy for children. Antiemetics are essential, especially as treatment becomes more intensive. Many drugs are available, but adequate evidence-based recommendations are lacking. We aimed (1) to consider an evidence-based approach for pharmacological prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in children, and (2) to compare this approach with antiemetic prescribing in two paediatric oncology centres.

PROCEDURE

Relevant publications (Medline, Embase, CancerLit:1966-2002) were critically evaluated using pre-defined criteria. Evidence-based statements summarising their findings were formulated, and evidence basis proposed. Current prescribing practice was then compared with this evidence basis in Welsh children under 16 receiving chemotherapy at Llandough Hospital, Cardiff or Alder Hey Children's Hospital, Liverpool between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2001.

RESULTS

Of 213 studies retrieved, 82 provided evidence. Our evidence basis recommends combination 5HT3-antagonist/corticosteroid for highly emetogenic chemotherapy, 5HT3-antagonist alone for moderate emetogenicity, and no antiemetic for other chemotherapy. Forty-four children in Cardiff (0.6-16.9 yrs) and 14 in Liverpool (0.8-16.2 yrs) were included in the audit. Differences in prescribing practice between the centres were not significant. In 109/159 (69%) of chemotherapy courses (35, 87 and 100% of high, moderate and low emetogenicity, respectively), antiemetics were selected in accordance with evidence basis. Seventy percent of prescribed doses were as evidence basis recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

We present an evidence basis for prescribing prophylactic antiemetics to children undergoing chemotherapy. Prescribing practices in these two centres treating Welsh children were similar. Both differed from the evidence basis we propose. Deviations were greatest for regimens of high emetogenicity, where effective emetic control is most crucial.