Clinical pathway audit tools: a systematic review.
Clinical pathway audit tools: a systematic review.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1365-2934.2006.00705.x
复制
发表时间：
2006-10-01
影响因子：
5.5
通讯作者：
Sermeus, Walter
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Vanhaecht, Kris;De Witte, Karel;Sermeus, Walter
目的：确定临床/护理路径审计工具是否可以识别组织良好的护理流程的特征。背景：虽然路径在世界范围内使用，但概念和影响存在混淆。OVID-Medline，Cinahl，British Nursing Index的评估搜索; Journal of Integrated Care Pathways的手动搜索;与Smartgroup on Clinical Pathways和European Pathway Association的董事会成员联系以及Google搜索。关键问题：我们选择了15种临床路径审核工具中的7种进行本次综述。通过内容分析，我们确定了17个特征，并使用现实的评价范式进行分组。综合护理路径评估工具是最合适的审计工具，以评估临床路径documents.CONCLUSIONS：这是令人惊讶的是，这么少的临床路径审计工具的研究已经进行，鉴于临床路径的普遍使用。由于临床路径的概念仍不清楚，因此需要各种审核工具来帮助澄清该概念。路径审计工具的结构和标准效度的进一步研究是必要的，以充分了解为什么以及在何种情况下路径导致改善护理。
AIM: To determine whether clinical/care pathway audit tools can identify the characteristics of well-organized care processes.BACKGROUND: Although pathways are used worldwide, confusion exists about the concept and impact. Evaluation Search of OVID-Medline, Cinahl, British Nursing Index; manual search of the Journal of Integrated Care Pathways; contact with Smartgroup on Clinical Pathways and board members of the European Pathway Association and Google search.KEY ISSUES: We selected seven of 15 clinical pathway audit tools for this review. Through content analysis, we identified 17 characteristics and grouped them using the realistic evaluation paradigm. The Integrated Care Pathway Appraisal Tool is the most appropriate audit tool to assess clinical pathway documents.CONCLUSIONS: It is astonishing that so little research on clinical pathway audit tools has been underwent, given the prevalent use of clinical pathways. Because the concept of clinical pathways remains unclear, a variety of audit tools are needed to help clarify the concept. Further research on the construct and criterion validity of pathway audit tools is necessary to fully understand why and under which circumstances pathways lead to improved care.