Health information technology implementation - impacts and policy considerations: a comparison between Israel and Portugal.

The use of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in health systems is increasing worldwide. While it is assumed that ICT holds great potential to make health services more efficient and grant patients more empowerment, research on these trends is at an early stage. Building on a study of the impact of ICT on physicians and patients in Israel, a Short Term Scientific Mission (STSM) sponsored by COST Net in conjunction with CIES/ISCTE IUL (Portugal) facilitated a comparison of ICT in health in Israel and Portugal. The comparison focused on patient empowerment, physician behavior and the role of government in implementing ICT. The research in both countries was qualitative in nature. In-depth interviews with the Ministry of Health (MOH), the private sector, patients associations, health plans and researchers were used to collect data. Purposeful sampling was used to select respondents, and secondary sources were used for triangulation. The findings indicate that respondents in both countries feel that patient empowerment has indeed been furthered by introduction of ICT. Regarding physicians, in both countries ICT is seen as providing more information that can be used in medical decision making. Increased access of patients to web-based medical information can strengthen the role of patients in decision making and improve the physician-patient relationship, but also shift the latter in ways that may require adjustments in physician orientation. Physician uptake of ICT in both countries involves overcoming certain barriers, such as resistance to change. At the national level, important differences were found between the two countries. While in Israel, ICT was promoted and adopted by the meso level of the health system, in particular the health plans and government intervention can be found in a later stage, in Portugal the government was the main developer and national strategies were built from the beginning. These two approaches present different advantages and disadvantages. Government involvement in earlier stages could provide benefit in terms of interoperability of systems between different healthcare organizations. However, innovation could be slowed down due to government bureaucracy or lack of leadership. The work provides information in order to understand and improve ICT services. Additionally, it provides input regarding impact of ICT on the physician/patient relationship and national policies in the area.

The effect of care pathways for hip fractures: a systematic overview of secondary studies.

The aim of this paper was to perform a systematic overview of secondary literature studies on care pathways (CPs) for hip fracture (HF). The online databases MEDLINE-PubMed, Ovid-EMBASE, CINAHL-EBSCO-host, and The Cochrane Library were searched. A total of six papers, corresponding to six secondary studies, were included but only four secondary studies were HF-specific and thus assessed. Secondary studies were evaluated for patients' clinical outcomes. There were wide differences among the studies that assessed the effects of CPs on HF patients, with some contrasting clinical outcomes reported. Secondary studies that were non-specific for CPs and included other multidisciplinary care approaches as well showed, in some cases, a shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) compared to usual care; studies that focused on promoting early mobilization showed better outcomes of mortality, morbidity, function, or service utilization; CPs mainly based on intensive occupational therapy and/or physical therapy exercises improved functional recovery and reduced LOS, with patients also discharged to a more favorable discharge destination; CPs principally focused on early mobilization improved functional recovery. A secondary study specifically designed for CPs showed lower odds of experiencing common complications of hospitalization after HF. In conclusion, although our overview suggests that CPs can reduce significantly LOS and can have a positive impact on different outcomes, data are insufficient for formal recommendations. To properly understand the effects of CPs for HF, a systematic review is needed of primary studies that specifically examined CPs for HF.

Quality indicators for in-hospital management of exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results of an international Delphi study.

AIM: To report a Delphi study that was conducted to select process and outcome indicators that are relevant to study quality of care and impact of care pathways for patients hospitalized with exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. BACKGROUND: Management of patients hospitalized with exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is suboptimal and outcomes are poor. To evaluate the impact of care pathways properly, relevant indicators need to be selected. DESIGN: Delphi study. METHODS: The study was conducted over 4 months in 2008, with 35 experts out of 15 countries, including 19 medical doctors, 8 nurses and 8 physiotherapists. Participants were asked to rate, for 72 process and 21 outcome indicators, the relevance for follow-up in care pathways for in-hospital management of exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Consensus (agreement by at least 75% of the participants) that an indicator is relevant for follow-up was sought in two rounds. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 26 of 72 process indicators (36·1%) and 10 of 21 outcome indicators (47·6%). Highest consensus levels were found for the process indicators regarding oxygen therapy (100%), pulmonary rehabilitation (100%) and patient education (94·5-88·6%) and for the outcome indicators concerning understanding of therapy (91·4-85·7%) and self-management (88·6-88·2%). CONCLUSION: The selected indicators appear to be sensitive for improvement. Therefore, researchers and clinicians that want to study and improve the care for patients hospitalized with exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease should primarily focus on these indicators.

The impact of care pathways for patients with proximal femur fracture: rationale and design of a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Proximal femur fracture (PFF) is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. The European Quality of Care Pathway (EQCP) study on PFF (NCT00962910) was designed to determine how care pathways (CP) for hospital treatment of PFF affect consistency of care, adherence to evidence-based key interventions, and clinical outcome. METHODS/DESIGN: An international cluster-randomized controlled trial (cRCT) will be performed in Belgium, Ireland, Italy and Portugal. Based on power analyses, a sample of 44 hospital teams and 437 patients per arm will be included in the study. In the control arm, usual care will be provided. Experimental teams will implement a care pathway which will include three active components: a formative evaluation of quality and organization of the care setting, a set of evidence-based key interventions, and support of the development and implementation of the CP. Main outcome will be the six-month mortality rate. DISCUSSION: The EQCP study constitutes the first international cRCT on care pathways. The EQCP project was designed as both a research and a quality improvement project and will provide a real-world framework for process evaluation to improve our understanding of why and when CP can really work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00962910.

The effect of care pathways for hip fractures: a systematic review.

We performed a systematic review for primary studies on care pathways (CPs) for hip fracture (HF). The online databases MEDLINE-PubMed, Ovid-EMBASE, CINAHL-EBSCO host, and The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, Health Technology Assessment Database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database) were searched. Two researchers reviewed the literature independently. Primary studies that met predefined inclusion criteria were assessed for their methodological quality. A total of 15 publications were included: 15 primary studies corresponding with 12 main investigations. Primary studies were evaluated for clinical outcomes, process outcomes, and economic outcomes. The studies assessed a wide range of outcome measures. While a number of divergent clinical outcomes were reported, most studies showed positive results of process management and health-services utilization. In terms of mortality, the results provided evidence for a positive impact of CPs on in-hospital mortality. Most studies also showed a significantly reduced risk of complications, including medical complications, wound infections, and pressure sores. Moreover, time-span process measures showed that an improvement in the organization of care was achieved through the use of CPs. Conflicting results were observed with regard to functional recovery and mobility between patients treated with CPs compared to usual care. Although our review suggests that CPs can have positive effects in patients with HF, the available evidence is insufficient for formal recommendations. There is a need for more research on CPs with selected process and outcome indicators, for in-hospital and postdischarge management of HF, with an emphasis on well-designed randomized trials.