The concept—and reality—of continuity of care crosses disciplinary and organisational boundaries. The common definitions provided here should help healthcare providers evaluate continuity more rigorously and improve communication 

Patients are increasingly seen by an array of providers in a wide variety of organisations and places, raising concerns about fragmentation of care. Policy reports and charters worldwide urge a concerted effort to enhance continuity,1–3 but efforts to describe the problem or formulate solutions are complicated by the lack of consensus on the definition of continuity. To add to the confusion, other terms such as continuum of care, coordination of care, discharge planning, case management, integration of services, and seamless care are often used synonymously. This synthesis was commissioned by three Canadian health services policy and research bodies. The aim was to develop a common understanding of the concept of continuity as a basis for valid and reliable measurement of practice in different settings.

We searched academic and policy literature for documents in which the principal focus was continuity of patient care or continuity. We searched electronic databases (Medline, HealthSTAR, Embase, CINAHL, Current Contents, PsychINFO, AIDSLINE, CancerLit, Cochrane Library, Dissertation abstracts, Papers1st (conferences and paper abstracts), Web of Science, WorldCat) as well as web library catalogues, peer reviewed internet sites, internet search engines, and several in-house databases. The search included documents dated from 1966 to November 2001 written in English, French, or Spanish. The reviewers (RJR, JLH, RMcK) used a data abstraction form to summarise relevant documents from every health discipline, and all reviewers read key documents.

We presented the results of an initial review of 314 documents to participants of a workshop on continuity held in Vancouver in June 2001. We obtained structured feedback to a discussion paper, problem based scenarios, and expert presentations. Participants validated the common themes …

/pdf/continuity-of-care-a-multidisciplinary-review-py5ch26lse.pdf

Continuity of care: a multidisciplinary review

Integrated care pathways are structured multidisciplinary care plans which detail essential steps in the care of patients with a specific clinical problem. They have been proposed as a way of encouraging the translation of national guidelines into local protocols and their subsequent application to clinical practice. They are also a means of improving systematic collection and abstraction of clinical data for audit and of promoting change in practice. The degree to which they succeed in realising this potential for improving patient care is still uncertain, but enough evidence exists in their favour to justify more widespread evaluation of their impact. Here we describe integrated care pathways, show how to create and use them, and review the evidence of their effectiveness.

Many initiatives have been introduced in the past two decades to improve clinical effectiveness and thereby patient care. Foremost among these have been clinical guidelines and clinical audit. Concern is regularly expressed, however, that the commitment and enthusiasm of the groups publishing their experience is a major determinant of their success. There are also related concerns about the opportunity costs of audit and guidelines projects.

Guidelines development—literature review, critical appraisal, multidisciplinary consultation, and grading of recommendations by level of evidence—is labour intensive. Support is now available from several sources,1 2 but less attention and support is given to translating established guidelines into local management protocols and their subsequent implementation.3 even though the impact of clinical guidelines in improving clinical practice will largely be determined by progress in these areas. Audit projects often fail to realise their potential because the improved practice identified by the audit is not implemented or, if implemented, its effect is not evaluated.

Integrated care pathways—also known as coordinated care pathways, care maps, or anticipated recovery pathways—are task orientated care plans which detail essential steps …

/pdf/integrated-care-pathways-28net7wqr4.pdf

Integrated care pathways

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 methods
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 11.95: 95%CI 4.72 to 30.30). 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.

/pdf/clinical-pathways-effects-on-professional-practice-patient-2sl6tkljsx.pdf

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

With the increasing differentiation of organisations involved in the pursuit of public health, there is also a growing need for inter-organisational integration. Starting from the concepts of differentiation and integration, this article is attempting a theoretical reconstruction based on published research on inter-organisational integration in public health and related welfare services. Different forms of integration are defined and related to each other in a conceptual framework, which is in itself an integration of different theoretical perspectives. According to this framework, integration in the field of public health requires inter-organisational collaboration across different sectors of the society. Such intersectoral collaboration can be organised mainly in the form of multidisciplinary teams across the boundaries of different organisations and sectors. Such an organisation is fragile and volatile, however, which means that it needs a lot of management support in order to survive.

Integration and collaboration in public health—a conceptual framework

Objective. To test clinical pathways in a variety of Italian health care organizations in 2000–2002 to measure performance in decreasing process and outcome variations.

Design. Creation of indicators, specific for each clinical pathway, to measure variations in the care processes and outcomes. Pre- and post-analysis model to evaluate the possible effect of the clinical pathways on each indicator.

Setting. We tested the clinical pathways in six sites, each with different clinical pathways.

Results. Reductions in health care macro-variation phenomena (length of stay, patient pathways, etc.) and in performance micro-variation (variations in diagnostic and therapeutic prescriptions, protocol implementation, etc.) were shown in sites where pathways were implemented successfully. A significant improvement in outcome for patients who were treated according to the clinical pathway for heart failure was also demonstrated.

Conclusions. The overall purpose of clinical pathways is to improve outcome by providing a mechanism to coordinate care and to reduce fragmentation, and ultimately cost. Our results demonstrated that it is possible to achieve this goal. Although controversial elements still exist, we think that clinical pathways can have a positive impact on quality in health care.

Reducing clinical variations with clinical pathways: do pathways work?

Integrated care pathways (ICPs) offer a system of multidisciplinary care planning based around the principle of clinical audit and on the knowledge and practice of local clinical staff. The system offers a set of guiding principles, based on the fact that, because knowledge and practice change continually when caring for patients, clinical records should be flexible and dynamic to accommodate these changes. Benefits to be gained from implementing ICPs include improvements in communication between all disciplines involved, as well as between patients and carers. Optimal levels of free text are ensured through the pre-printed record having an outcomes-based focus and through incorporating the idea of exception-based recording. Issues to be considered include individuality and confidentiality. Benefits to be gained include increased patient satisfaction, a reduction in documentation and inappropriate lengths of stay.

Rhona Hotchkiss

Papers

Integrated care pathways