Effectiveness of a clinical pathway for acute stroke care in a district general hospital: an audit

William J Taylor, Annie Wong, Richard J Siegert, Harry K McNaughton, William J Taylor, Annie Wong, Richard J Siegert, Harry K McNaughton

Abstract

Background: Organised stroke care saves lives and reduces disability. A clinical pathway might be a form of organised stroke care, but the evidence for the effectiveness of this model of care is limited.

Methods: This study was a retrospective audit study of consecutive stroke admissions in the setting of an acute general medical unit in a district general hospital. The case-notes of patients admitted with stroke for a 6-month period before and after introduction of the pathway, were reviewed to determine data on length of stay, outcome, functional status, (Barthel Index, BI and Modified Rankin Scale, MRS), Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project (OCSP) sub-type, use of investigations, specific management issues and secondary prevention strategies. Logistic regression was used to adjust for differences in case-mix.

Results: N = 77 (prior to the pathway) and 76 (following the pathway). The median (interquartile range, IQR) age was 78 years (67.75-84.25), 88% were European NZ and 37% were male. The median (IQR) BI at admission for the pre-pathway group was less than the post-pathway group: 6 (0-13.5) vs. 10 (4-15.5), p = 0.018 but other baseline variables were statistically similar. There were no significant differences between any of the outcome or process of care variables, except that echocardiograms were done less frequently after the pathway was introduced. A good outcome (MRS < 4) was obtained in 66.2% prior to the pathway and 67.1% after the pathway. In-hospital mortality was 20.8% and 23.1%. However, using logistic regression to adjust for the differences in admission BI, it appeared that admission after the pathway was introduced had a significant negative effect on the probability of good outcome (OR 0.29, 95%CI 0.09-0.99).

Conclusion: A clinical pathway for acute stroke management appeared to have no benefit for the outcome or processes of care and may even have been associated with worse outcomes. These data support the conclusions of a recent Cochrane review.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Case identification flow-chart.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Outcomes at hospital discharge. Top: Discharge location from medical unit. Centre: Discharge location from hospital. Bottom: Modified Rankin Scale of survivors at discharge from hospital.

References

    1. Langhorne P, Williams BO, Gilchrist W, Howie K. Do stroke units save lives? The Lancet. 1993;342:395–398. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)92813-9.
    1. Rudd AG, Irwin P, Rutledge Z, Lowe D, Morris R, Pearson MG. The national sentinel audit for stroke: a tool for raising standards of care. 1999;30:460-464. J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1999;30:460–464.
    1. Barber A, Anderson NE, Bennett P, Gommans J. Acute stroke services in New Zealand. NZ Med J. 2002;115:3–6.
    1. Cannon CP, Hand MH, Bahr R, Boden WE, Christenson R, Gibler WB, Eagle K, Lambrew CT, Lee TH, MacLeod B, Ornato JP, Selker HP, Steele P, Zalenski RJ, National Heart Attack Alert Program Coordinating Committee Critical Pathways Writing G. Critical pathways for management of patients with acute coronary syndromes: an assessment by the National Heart Attack Alert Program. American Heart Journal. 2002;143:777–789. doi: 10.1067/mhj.2002.120971.
    1. Marley AM. A care pathway for COPD. Professional Nurse. 2000;16:821–823.
    1. Anonymous Clinical pathways for general surgeons: acute upper GI bleeding--peptic ulcer. American Surgeon. 1999;65:295–297.
    1. Kwan J, Sandercock P. In-hospital care pathways for stroke: A Cochrane Systematic Review. Stroke. 2003:587–588. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000054673.28010.1B.
    1. Rudd AG, Matchar DB. Health Policy and Outcome Research in Stroke. Stroke. 2004;35:397–400. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000115935.76330.24.
    1. Asplund K, Tuomilehto J, Stegmayr B, Wester PO, Tunstall-Pedoe H. Diagnostic criteria and quality control of the registration of stroke events in the MONICA project. Acta Med Scand. 1988;Suppl 728:26–39.
    1. Wardlaw JM, Dennis MS, Lindley RI, Sellar RJ, Warlow CP. The validity of a simple clinical classification of acute ischaemic stroke. Journal of Neurology 1996 Mar;243(3):274-9.
    1. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic morbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. Journal of Chronic Disease. 1987;40:373–383. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8.
    1. Collin C, Wade DT, Davies S, Horne V. The Barthel ADL Index: a reliability study. International Disability Studies 1988;10(2):61-3.
    1. van Swieten JC, Koudstaal PJ, Visser MC, Schouten HJ, van Gijn J. Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke. 1988;19:604–607.
    1. Sulter G, Steen C, Jacques De Keyser Use of the Barthel Index and Modified Rankin Scale in Acute Stroke Trials. Stroke. 1999;30:1538–1541.
    1. Davenport RJ, Dennis MS, Warlow CP. Effect of correcting outcome data for case mix: an example from stroke medicine. BMJ. 1996;312:1503–1505.
    1. McNaughton H, McPherson K, Taylor W, Weatherall M. Relationship Between Process and Outcome in Stroke Care. Stroke. 2003;34:713–717. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000057580.23952.0D.
    1. Evans A, Perez I, Harraf F, Melbourn A, Steadman J, Donaldson N. Can differences in management processes explain different outcomes between stroke unit and stroke-team care? Lancet. 2001;358:1586–1592. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06652-1.

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel