covid
Buscar en
Revista de Calidad Asistencial
Toda la web
Inicio Revista de Calidad Asistencial Resultados e impacto de una vía clínica para trasplante renal tras un año de ...
Journal Information
Vol. 18. Issue 1.
Pages 9-19 (January 2003)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Vol. 18. Issue 1.
Pages 9-19 (January 2003)
Full text access
Resultados e impacto de una vía clínica para trasplante renal tras un año de desarrollo
Visits
3260
Sara Hernándeza,1
Corresponding author
sara_hernandez@navegalia.com

Correspondencia Sara Hernández Gutiérrez Servicio de Medicina Preventiva. Hospital Universitario La Paz Paseo de la Castellana, 261. 28046 Madrid. España.
, Juan Garcíaa, Carlos Jiménezb, Fernando Escuinb, Beatriz Mahilloa, Rafael Herruzoa, Ángel Taberneroc, Carlos Núñezc
a Servicio de Medicina Preventiva
b Servicio de Nefrología
c Servicio de Urología. Hospital Universitario La Paz. Madrid. España
This item has received
Article information
Resumen
Fundamento

La disminución de la variabilidad inapropiada en la práctica clínica es una oportunidad de mejora de la calidad asistencial. Las vías clínicas representan una posible solución para este tipo de variabilidad. El objetivo del estudio fue evaluar el impacto de una vía clínica para trasplante renal.

Métodos

A los 3 meses de implantación de la vía se realizó un análisis preliminar. Tras la puesta en marcha de medidas de mejora se prosigue con la implantación definitiva. Pasado 1 año se evalúan los resultados y el impacto. Se revisa la documentación de los pacientes atendidos mediante el análisis de la cobertura, las estancias, las variaciones, los sucesos adversos y la satisfacción. Se comparan los resultados obtenidos con los 12 meses anteriores a la implantación.

Resultados

Entre noviembre de 1999 y noviembre de 2000 fueron intervenidos 32 pacientes. La cobertura de la vía fue del 97%. Las estancias hospitalaria y urológica se cumplieron por el 48,4% y el 62,1% de los pacientes. La estancia media hospitalaria fue de 18,9 días frente a 22,1 en el período anterior a la vía y representó una diferencia no significativa (p = 0,203), aunque se observa una importante disminución de la variabilidad-desviación estándar [DE]: 8,33 frente a 11,04 días). El mayor número de variaciones dependió del enfermo (68,2%). El porcentaje de sucesos adversos fue del 61,3% frente al 90,3% (p = 0,016). Se consideraron como predictores independientes de episodios adversos: la estancia (odds ratio [OR] = 1,32, p = 0,004) y la condición pre-vía (OR = 7,42, p = 0,017). La cobertura de la encuesta de satisfacción fue del 68%. La satisfacción con la atención recibida fue del 94,5%.

Conclusiones

Se han detectado oportunidades de mejora, cumplimiento de estancias o cobertura de encuesta, pero la disminución de la variabilidad en estancia, sin incremento de acontecimientos no deseados y su disminución al controlar por estancia en pacientes con vía, confirma que la vía clínica de trasplante renal es una herramienta útil para disminuir la variabilidad y mejorar la calidad científicotécnica, la calidad percibida y la eficiencia en la práctica clínica.

Palabras clave:
Vías clínicas
Evaluación
Trasplante renal
Summary
Background

The reduction of unsuitable variability in clinical practice constitutes an opportunity for improving health care quality. Clinical pathways are one of the possible solutions for this variability. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of a clinical pathway for renal transplant.

Methods

A preliminary analysis was performed 3 months after implantation of the clinical pathway. Improvement measures were introduced and the definitive implementation of the pathway was performed. After 1 year, the results and impact of the clinical pathway were evaluated. The documentation of patients treated in the clinical pathway was reviewed by analyzing coverage, length of stay, variations, adverse events and satisfaction. The results were compared with those for the 12 months prior to implantation of the clinical pathway.

Results

Between November 1999 and November 2000, 32 patients were examined. The clinical pathway coverage was 97%. Lengths of stay in the hospital and urological service were complied with in 48.39% and 62.1% of the patients. The mean hospital stay was 18.9 days compared with 22.1 days in the pre-clinical pathway period. This difference was not significant (p = 0.203), although variability was considerably reduced (SD = 8.33 compared with SD = 11.04 days). Most variations were due to the patients (68.21%). The percentage of adverse events was 61.3% compared with 90.3% (p = 0.016). Independent predictive factors for adverse events were length of hospital stay (p = 0.004, OR = 1.32) and treatment before implementation of the clinical pathway (p = 0.017, OR = 7.42). Sixty-eight percent of the patients participated in the satisfaction survey. Satisfaction with the health care received was 94.5%.

Conclusions

Opportunities for improvement in fulfillment of lengths of stay and survey response were detected. However, the reduction in length of stay variability, with no increase in adverse events and the diminution of these events when the length of stay was controlled in patients with a clinical pathway, serves to confirm the usefulness of the renal transplant clinical pathway as a tool for reducing variability and improving scientific and technical quality, perceived quality and clinical practice efficiency.

Key words:
Clinical pathways
Evaluation
Renal transplant
Full text is only aviable in PDF
Bibliografía
[1.]
J. García, J. Díez, L. Chamorro, A. Navas, A. Franco, J. Arribas.
Vías Clínicas.
Med Prevent, 5 (1999), pp. 28-39
[2.]
B. Bradshaw, S. Liu, R. Thirlby.
Standardized perioperative care protocols and reduced length of stay after colon surgery.
J Am Coll Surg, 186 (1998), pp. 501-506
[3.]
G. Whetsell.
Total Quality Management.
Quality in health care: theory, application and evolution. Gaithersburg, pp. 79-91
[4.]
R. Bohmer.
Critical Pathways at Massachusetts General Hospital.
J Vasc Surg, 28 (1998), pp. 373-377
[5.]
T. Hwang, E. Wilkinks, J. Lowery, J. Gentile.
Implementation and evaluation of a clinical pathway por TRAM breast reconstruction.
Plast Reconstr Surg, 105 (2000), pp. 541-548
[6.]
H. Campbell, R. Hotchkiss, N. Bradshaw, M. Porteus.
Integrated care pathways.
BMJ, 316 (1998), pp. 133-137
[7.]
R. Coffey, J. Richards, C. Remmert, S. Leroy, R. Schoville, P. Badwin.
An introduction to critical paths.
Quality in health care: theory, application and evolution. Gaithersburg, pp. 139-156
[8.]
J. Grimshaw, N. Freemantle, S. Wallace, I. Russell, I. Hurtwitz, A. Long, et al.
Developing and implementing clinical practice guidelines.
Qual Health Care, 4 (1995), pp. 55-64
[9.]
P. Gibson, A. Wilson.
The use of continuous quality improvement methods to implement practice guidelines in asthma.
J Qual Clin Practice, 16 (1996), pp. 87-102
[10.]
N. Every, J. Hochman, R. Becker, S. Kopecky, C. Cannon.
Critical pathways. A review.
Circulation, 101 (2000), pp. 461-465
[11.]
C. Gregor, S. Pope, D. Werry, P. Dodek.
Reduced length of stay and improved appropriateness of care with a clinical path for total knee or hip arthroplasty.
J Qual Improvement, 22 (1996), pp. 617-627
[12.]
T. Brothers, J. Robison, B. Elliott.
Relevance of quality improvement methods to surgical practice: prospective assessment of carotid endarterectomy.
Am Surg, 63 (1997), pp. 213-219
[13.]
K. Calligaro, M. Dougherty, C. Raviola, D. Musser, D. De Laurentis.
Impact of clinical pathways on hospital costs and early outcome after major vascular surgery.
J Vasc Surg, 22 (1995), pp. 649-660
[14.]
P. Chang, S. Huang, M. Hsieh, T. Wang, J. Chen, H. Kno, et al.
Use of the transurethral prostatectomy clinical path to monitor health outcomes.
J Urol, 157 (1997), pp. 177-183
[15.]
T. Marrie, C. Lau, S. Wheeler, C. Wong, M. Vandervoort, B. Feagan.
A controlled trial of a critical pathway for treatment of community-acquired pneumonia.
JAMA, 283 (2000), pp. 749-755
[16.]
T. Kwan-Gett, P. Lozano, K. Mullin, E. Marcuse.
One-year experience with an inpatient asthma clinical pathway.
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, 151 (1997), pp. 684-689
[17.]
L. Courtney, M. Gordon, L. Romer.
A clinical path for adult diabetes.
Diabetes Educ, 23 (1997), pp. 664-671
[18.]
R. Stratta, K. Cushing, K. Frisbie, S. Miller.
Analysis of hospital charges after simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation in the era of managed care.
Transplantation, 64 (1997), pp. 287-292
[19.]
J. Holtzman, T. Bjerke, R. Kane.
The effects of clinical pathways for renal transplant on patient outcomes and length of stay.
Medical Care, 36 (1998), pp. 826-834
[20.]
S. Hauser.
Case management of the kidney transplant recipient.
ANNA J, 22 (1995), pp. 369-374
[21.]
Renal transplantation path saves (34k per patient.
Hosp Case Manag, 7 (1999), pp. 5-8
[22.]
K. Cushing, R. Stratta.
Design, development, and implementation of a critical pathway in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant recipients.
J Transpl Coord, 7 (1997), pp. 164-172
[23.]
I. Darrikhuma.
Development of a renal transplant clinical pathway: one hospital’s journey.
AACN Clin Issues, 10 (1999), pp. 270-284
[24.]
C. Cabello.
Use of variance outcomes to improve the management of the adult kidney transplant patient.
Outcomes Manag Nurs Pract, 5 (2001), pp. 153-160
Copyright © 2003. Sociedad Española de Calidad Asistencial
Article options
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos