PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11276651

Enhancing outcomes: guidelines, standards, and protocols.

M E Kingston·J M Krumberger·W T Peruzzi
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Guidelines, protocols, and standards have gained attention as clinical tools designed to enhance clinical decision-making and practice. Yet, evidence has emerged that clinicians are having difficulty integrating new knowledge presented by these tools into practice. This article explores the benefits and barriers to using guidelines and protocols, probes the issues of producing these tools, and examines processes that are critical to constructing valid tools. The key functions important in successful development and implementation of guidelines and protocols are presented, as well as the direction these clinical adjuncts will take in the future.

Explore related subjects

Critical PathwaysEvidence-Based MedicineHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CarePractice Guidelines as TopicJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M E Kingston, J M Krumberger, W T Peruzzi. 2000. Enhancing outcomes: guidelines, standards, and protocols.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00044067-200008000-00004

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Clinical management. Design for living.

91 per cent of patients started treatment within two mounths of referral, compared to 70-80 per cent last year. The last five months has seen rapid progress at a rate of 2 per cent a month. Sustaining improvement depends on leadership, measurement and looking at the whole patient pathway.

Critical Pathways↗
PubMed2006

[Clinical pathways -- first results of a systematic IT-supported application at a surgical department of a university hospital].

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In analogy to industrial process management, clinical pathways have been introduced for operational process organisation in orthopedic and interventional procedures as well as for conservative treatments. Within this study, introduction and continuous, systematic application of clinical pathways at a surgical department of a university hospital was investigated. METHODS: Analysis was performed by IT-based (SAP/i. s. h.med) evaluation of the registered data regarding pathway violations. Additionally, patients' records were matched with the computerized data for quality assurance of pathway documentation. RESULTS: 501 patients were entered in 16 clinical pathways (31 +/- 39 patients per pathway). The mean period from the introduction of a distinct pathway to the data acquisition of the present study ranged from 2 to 14 months (mean 7+/-7.5 months). Pathway violations correlated with the complexity, but not with the period since the pathway was introduced. Organisational reasons next to medical reasons (i. e. delayed gastric function or wound healing) were the most frequent causes for pathway violations. CONCLUSION: Clinical pathways may not only be realised for operative procedures or conservative treatments, but represent a clinical and administrative management instrument at a surgical department of a university hospital for daily work routine. They are suitable as an instrument for clinical quality and risk management, as an economic control instrument in reorganisation phases as well as in the routine of surgical clinics.

Critical Pathways↗