Development and implementation of a clinical pathway for severe traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Clinical pathways (CPs) have been shown to be beneficial in optimizing patient care and resource use. METHODS: A multidisciplinary CP for the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale score of 3-7) was developed. Data from these patients (group I) were collected prospectively and compared with a retrospective database (group II). RESULTS: There were a total of 119 patients managed in conjunction with the CP and 43 patients in the control group. No statistical differences were found between the groups in age, Glasgow Coma Scale score at 24 hours, or Injury Severity Scores. There was a significant decrease in the length of hospital stay, intensive care unit stay, and length of ventilator support in the study group (group I: 22.5, 16.8, and 11.5 days, respectively; group II: 31.0, 21.2, and 14.4 days, respectively; p < 0.03). CONCLUSION: The use of this CP helped to standardize and improve patient care with fewer complications and a potential cost savings of approximately $14,000 per patient.

Development and implementation of a clinical pathway for spinal cord injuries.

The authors have developed a clinical pathway for the treatment of spinal cord injuries to help improve patient care. A clinical pathway for the treatment of patients with spinal cord injury was developed through a multidisciplinary approach. The control group (group 1) consisted of patients who were treated in the 2 years before the initiation of the pathway. Data from patients treated in conjunction with this pathway were collected prospectively (group 2). Thirty-six patients were treated in conjunction with the pathway compared with 22 in the control group. Group 2 had 6.8 fewer intensive care unit days, 11.5 fewer hospital days, 6 fewer ventilator days (p < 0.05), and a lower rate of complications. The use of a clinical care pathway for spinal cord injuries has resulted in improved patient care and fewer complications.

Successful incorporation of the Severe Head Injury Guidelines into a phased-outcome clinical pathway.

Clinical pathways have been proven to be valuable tools in improving outcomes in patients with neurological diagnoses. However, their use with trauma populations has been limited. The unpredictable nature of trauma makes it difficult to develop a day-by-day plan of care that would be applicable to all patients with the same trauma diagnosis. Nevertheless, a severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) clinical pathway was developed and implemented at a Level 1 Trauma Center with significant reductions in length of stay and number of ventilator days. With the publication of the Guidelines for the Management of Severe Head Injury, this pathway was refashioned into a severe TBI phased-outcome pathway. Rather than a day-by-day plan of care, this clinical pathway consists of four phases of care: (a) admission to the intensive care unit, (b) acute critical care, (c) mobility and weaning, and (d) pre-rehabilitation. After 12 months, the improvements accomplished by the original pathway have been maintained or exceeded.

Effect of a clinical pathway for severe traumatic brain injury on resource utilization.

BACKGROUND: The usefulness of clinical pathways for the complex trauma patient is unclear. We analyzed the effect of a clinical pathway for severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) on resource utilization. METHODS: A clinical pathway for severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score < or = 8 at 24 hours) was developed by a multidisciplinary team and used for all patients with severe TBI. Data were gathered prospectively for 15 months and compared with data from historical controls from the previous year. Patients who survived < 48 hours were excluded. RESULTS: The clinical pathway was used for 84 patients with severe TBI and compared with 49 historical controls. No differences in Injury Severity Scores (27 vs. 27) or GCS scores at 24 hours (6.2 vs. 6.5) existed between control or pathway patients. There was an overall increase in the mortality rate of pathway patients (from 12.2 to 21.4%), but this was entirely attributable to withdrawal of care that was initiated by family members in patients with an average age of 71 years, an average GCS score of 4.7, and an average Injury Severity Score of 29. Among survivors, pathway patients had a significant decrease in ventilator days (11.5 +/- 0.9 vs. 14.6 +/- 1.2; p < 0.05), intensive care unit days (16.7 +/- 1.0 vs. 21.2 +/- 1.4; p < 0.05), and hospital days (23.4 +/- 1.2 vs. 31.0 +/- 3.0; p < 0.05). There were no differences in the incidence of complications or functional outcomes. CONCLUSION: The use of a clinical pathway for severe TBI resulted in a significant reduction in resource utilization. This study suggests that clinical pathways may be a useful component of patient care after blunt trauma.