Epidemiologic determination of community-based nursing case management for stroke

Care pathways for acute stroke care and stroke rehabilitation: from theory to evidence

Care pathways aim to promote evidence- and guideline-based care, improve the organisation and efficiency of care, and reduce cost. In the past decade, care pathways have been increasingly implemented as a tool in acute stroke care and stroke rehabilitation. In the most recent Cochrane systematic review, which included three randomised and 12 non-randomised studies, patient management with stroke care pathways was found to have no significant benefit on functional outcome, and patient satisfaction and quality of life might actually be worse. On the other hand, it was associated with a higher proportion of patients receiving investigations and a lower risk of developing certain complications such as infections and readmissions. Overall, the evidence supports the use of care pathways in acute stroke but not stroke rehabilitation. Future developments, including electronic care pathways, patient pathways, and pre-hospital care pathways for hyperacute stroke, will be discussed.

In-hospital care pathways for stroke

BACKGROUND

Stroke care pathways have the potential to promote organised and efficient patient care that is based on best evidence and guidelines, but evidence to support their use is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the effects of care pathways, compared with standard medical care, among patients with acute stroke who had been admitted to hospital.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched in June 2003), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2003), MEDLINE (1975 to June 2003), EMBASE (1980 to June 2003), CINAHL (1982 to June 2003), ISI Proceedings: Science & Technology (1990 to November 2003), and HealthSTAR (1994 to May 2001). We also handsearched the Journal of Integrated Care Pathways (2001 to 2003), formerly Journal of Managed Care (1997 to 1998) and Journal of Integrated Care (1998 to 2001). Reference lists of articles were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies that compared care pathway care with standard medical care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One reviewer selected studies for inclusion and the other independently checked the decisions. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of the studies. One reviewer extracted the data and the other checked the extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Three randomised controlled trials (340 patients) and 12 non-randomised studies (4081 patients) were included. There was significant statistical heterogeneity in the analysis of many of the outcomes. We found no significant difference between care pathway and control groups in terms of death or discharge destination. Patients managed with a care pathway were: (a) more dependent at discharge (P = 0.04); (b) less likely to suffer a urinary tract infection (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.51, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.34 to 0.79); (c) less likely to be readmitted (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.39); and (d) more likely to have neuroimaging (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.25). Evidence from randomised trials suggested that patient satisfaction and quality of life were significantly lower in the care pathway group (P = 0.02 and P < 0.005 respectively).

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Use of stroke care pathways may be associated with positive and negative effects. Since most of the results have been derived from non-randomised studies, they are likely to be influenced by potential biases and confounding factors. There is currently insufficient supporting evidence to justify the routine implementation of care pathways for acute stroke management or stroke rehabilitation.

In-hospital care pathways for stroke

BACKGROUND

Stroke care pathways have the potential to promote organised and efficient patient care that is based on best evidence and guidelines, but evidence to support their use is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the effects of care pathways, compared with standard medical care, among patients with acute stroke who had been admitted to hospital.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched in June 2003), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2003), MEDLINE (1975 to June 2003), EMBASE (1980 to June 2003), CINAHL (1982 to June 2003), ISI Proceedings: Science & Technology (1990 to November 2003), and HealthSTAR (1994 to May 2001). We also handsearched the Journal of Integrated Care Pathways (2001 to 2003), formerly Journal of Managed Care (1997 to 1998) and Journal of Integrated Care (1998 to 2001). Reference lists of articles were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies that compared care pathway care with standard medical care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One reviewer selected studies for inclusion and the other independently checked the decisions. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of the studies. One reviewer extracted the data and the other checked the extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Three randomised controlled trials (340 patients) and 12 non-randomised studies (4081 patients) were included. There was significant statistical heterogeneity in the analysis of many of the outcomes. We found no significant difference between care pathway and control groups in terms of death or discharge destination. Patients managed with a care pathway were: (a) more dependent at discharge (P = 0.04); (b) less likely to suffer a urinary tract infection (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.51, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.34 to 0.79); (c) less likely to be readmitted (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.39); and (d) more likely to have neuroimaging (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.25). Evidence from randomised trials suggested that patient satisfaction and quality of life were significantly lower in the care pathway group (P = 0.02 and P < 0.005 respectively).

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Use of stroke care pathways may be associated with positive and negative effects. Since most of the results have been derived from non-randomised studies, they are likely to be influenced by potential biases and confounding factors. There is currently insufficient supporting evidence to justify the routine implementation of care pathways for acute stroke management or stroke rehabilitation.

Changes in the status of hospitalized stroke patients since inception of the prospective payment system in 1983

OBJECTIVE

To describe epidemiologically the changes in acute-care delivery services for stroke victims since the inception of the 1983 prospective payment system (PPS).

DESIGN

A cross-sectional comparison of 2 acute-care hospitalized samples of stroke patients before and after implementation of PPS.

SETTING

Fifteen acute-care hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1992 stroke patients discharged from 15 acute care hospitals in 1995-1996 were compared with 1665 patients studied in the same geographic area in 1981-1982.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence rates, length of stay (LOS), discharge destinations, in-hospital transfers, and mortality.

RESULTS

Incidence rates between the 2 time periods remained similar (1.13-1.14/1000). Major changes between 1981-1982 and 1995-1996 included reengineering of hospitals to establish subacute units with an increased use of rehabilitation units, a 63% decrease in acute hospital LOS, a 44% increase in discharges to long-term care facilities, a 39% decrease in mortality, and a 5% decrease in discharge to home. Age (avg, 71y), gender, and living arrangements confounded discharge destinations. Significantly more men in 1995-1996 had strokes at younger ages, but overall 53% were women.

CONCLUSIONS

Institution of the PPS has dramatically influenced hospital LOS, location of treatment, and discharge destinations with no improvement in home discharges.

[Content validity of an information system used for head injury rehabilitation based on an analysis of medical records]

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the content validity of the TCC-Québec Information System based on an analysis of rehabilitation medical records. The goal was to determine the agreement between the variables of the TCC-Québec Information System identified by experts and based on an extensive literature review and those found in medical records.

METHOD

The medical records of 82 adults with a head injury were reviewed. The individuals had been hospitalized from 1997 to 1998 at three different acute care facilities or three rehabilitation centers. The abstractor determined if the information pertaining to a variable (e.g. personal history, impairments, or disabilities relating to sensori-motor function) was present in the record. A standardized and reliable procedure was used to ensure the quality of data extraction. The percentage of variables found in the medical records and the number of records in which each variable was documented were calculated for each clinical setting (acute care or rehabilitation) and for the different geographical regions.

RESULTS

The results suggest that a large discrepancy exists between what experts desired to be included in the information system and what is really documented clinically. No discrepancy exists between the different regions. Only 23% of variables were found in more than 70% of records.

CONCLUSION

This study provides recommendations about the most relevant variables to be included in an information system based on clinicians'information needs and the clinical reality. As such, these results should facilitate the use and implementation of the information system under study.

In-hospital care pathways for stroke

BACKGROUND

Care within a stroke unit reduces death or dependency after stroke. However, studies have found significant variations in clinical practice, access to stroke unit care, organisation of patient care, and clinical outcome. Stroke care pathways have been introduced as a method to promote organised and efficient patient care that is based on best evidence and guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the effects of care pathways, as compared to standard medical care, among patients with acute stroke who had been admitted to hospital.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Specialised Trials Register (last searched in May 2001), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 4, 2000), MEDLINE (1975-2000), EMBASE (1980-2000), CINAHL (1982-2000), the Index to Scientific and Technical Proceedings (ISTP, May 2001), and HealthSTAR (May 2001). We also handsearched the Journal of Managed Care (1997 to 1998), which was later renamed the Journal of Integrated Care (1998 to 2001). Reference lists of articles were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies (quasi-randomised trials, comparative studies, controlled and uncontrolled before and after studies, and interrupted time series) that compared care pathway care with standard medical care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One reviewer selected studies for inclusion and the other independently checked the decisions. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of the studies. One reviewer extracted the data and the other checked the extracted data. Data from randomised and non-randomised studies were analysed separately. We found significant statistical heterogeneity in the analysis of two outcomes (computed tomography brain scanning and duration of stay).

MAIN RESULTS

There were three randomised controlled trials (total of 340 patients) and seven non-randomised studies (total of 1673 patients) that compared care pathway care with standard medical care. We found no difference between care pathway and control groups in terms of death, dependency, or discharge destination. Evidence from mainly non-randomised studies suggests that patients managed using a care pathway may be: a) less likely to suffer a urinary tract infection (OR 0.38, CI 0.18 to 0.79), b) less likely to be readmitted (OR 0.11, CI 0.03 to 0.39), and c) more likely to have a computed tomography brain scan (OR 3.66, CI 1.45 to 9.27) or carotid duplex study (OR 2.45, CI 1.3 to 4.61). Evidence from randomised trials suggests that patient satisfaction and quality of life may be significantly lower in the care pathway group (P=0.02 and P<0.005 respectively).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The use of care pathways to manage stroke patients in hospital may be associated with both positive and negative effects on the process of care and clinical outcomes. Since most of the results have been derived from non-randomised studies, they are likely to be influenced by potential biases and confounding factors. There is currently insufficient supporting evidence to justify routine implementation of care pathways for acute stroke management or stroke rehabilitation.