Search

Background: Clinical pathways can enhance care quality, promote patient safety and optimize resource utilization. However, they are infrequently utilized in intensive care. This study aimed to explain the implementation process of a clinical pathway based on a bottom-up approach in an intensive care context., Methods: The setting was an 11-bed general intensive care unit in Sweden. An action research project was conducted to implement a clinical pathway for patients on mechanical ventilation. The project was managed by a local interprofessional core group and was externally facilitated by two researchers. Grounded theory was used by the researchers to explain the implementation process. The sampling in the study was purposeful and theoretical and included registered nurses (n31), assistant nurses (n26), anesthesiologists (n11), a physiotherapist (n1), first- and second-line managers (n2), and health records from patients on mechanical ventilation (n136). Data were collected from 2011 to 2016 through questionnaires, repeated focus groups, individual interviews, logbooks/field notes and health records. Constant comparative analysis was conducted, including both qualitative data and descriptive statistics from the quantitative data., Results: A conceptual model of the clinical pathway implementation process emerged, and a central phenomenon, which was conceptualized as 'Struggling for a feasible tool,' was the core category that linked all categories. The phenomenon evolved from the 'Triggers' ('Perceiving suboptimal practice' and 'Receiving external inspiration and support'), pervaded the 'Implementation process' ('Contextual circumstances,' 'Processual circumstances' and 'Negotiating to achieve progress'), and led to the process 'Output' ('Varying utilization' and 'Improvements in understanding and practice'). The categories included both facilitating and impeding factors that made the implementation process tentative and prolonged but also educational., Conclusions: The findings provide a novel understanding of a bottom-up implementation of a clinical pathway in an intensive care context. Despite resonating well with existing implementation frameworks/theories, the conceptual model further illuminates the complex interaction between different circumstances and negotiations and how this interplay has consequences for the implementation process and output. The findings advocate a bottom-up approach but also emphasize the need for strategic priority, interprofessional participation, skilled facilitators and further collaboration.

Rationale, Aims and Objectives: Clinical pathways (CPs) can improve quality of care on intensive care units (ICUs), but are infrequently utilized and of varying quality. Knowledge regarding factors that facilitate versus hinder successful implementation of CPs is insufficient and a better understanding of the activities and individuals involved is needed. The aim of this study was to explore the implementation process of CPs within the context of ICUs., Methods: An exploratory design with a sequential mixed method was used. A CP survey, including all Swedish ICUs, was used to collect quantitative data from ICUs using CPs (n = 15) and interviews with key informants (n = 10) were used to collect qualitative data from the same ICUs. Descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis were used, and the quantitative and qualitative findings were integrated., Results: The CP implementation was conceptualized according to two interplaying themes: a process to realize the usefulness of CPs and create new habits; and a necessity of enthusiasm, support and time. Multiple factors affected the process and those factors were organized in six main categories and 14 subcategories., Conclusions: Bottom-up initiatives, interprofessional project groups and small ICUs seem to enhance successful implementation of CPs while inadequate electronic health record systems, insufficient support and time constrains can be barriers. Support regarding the whole implementation process from centralized units at the local hospitals, as well as cooperation between ICUs and national guidance, has the potential to raise the quality of CPs and benefit the progress of CP implementation., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Rationale, Aims and Objectives: To identify the prevalence of clinical pathways (CPs) in Swedish intensive care units (ICUs) and to explore the quality, content and evidence base of the documents., Methods: A descriptive and explorative survey of all Swedish ICUs (N84) and a review of submitted examples of CPs (n12) were conducted., Results: CPs were in use at 20% of the Swedish ICUs. There was a significant geographic variation but no relationship between the use of CPs and category of hospital, type of ICU, size of ICU or type of health record applied. In total, 56 CPs were reported within a range of scopes and extensions. The content of the ICUs' CPs, as well as the degree to which they were interprofessional, evidence based, and renewed varied., Conclusions: Progress has been made in relation to CPs in recent years, but there is potential for further improvements. None of the ICUs had CPs that contained all key characteristics of a high-quality, interprofessional and evidence-based CP identified in the literature. Greater knowledge sharing and cooperation within the field would be beneficial, and further research is needed., (© 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

The aim of the present study was to identify and describe intensive care nurses' different conceptions of a critical pathway in caring for patients that have undergone aortic-surgery. Individual semi-structured interviews with eight specialist registered nurses at a Swedish intensive care unit were conducted and phenomenographically analysed. Three descriptive categories, with a total of five sub-categories, constituted the outcome-space of how the pathway was conceived of in caring: as a guide open to individual patients needs (clinical judgement governs caring and patient autonomy governs caring), as an instrument to promote patient safety (a source of knowledge, a planning tool and a reference standard) and as a source of support for professional confidence. In accordance with current literature, the nurses in the present study identified a number of advantages in applying the pathway in caring even if they were also conscious that the use of a pathway can give rise to unreflective standardisation. The nurses' conceptions indicate that the pathway prescribed for managing patients who have undergone aortic surgery is supportive and facilitates patient safety without jeopardising respect for the patient's individual care needs. This insight may be used to influence a thoughtful dialogue about the practice of pathways in intensive care., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Abstract Background Clinical pathways can enhance care quality, promote patient safety and optimize resource utilization. However, they are infrequently utilized in intensive care. This study aimed to explain the implementation process of a clinical pathway based on a bottom-up approach in an intensive care context. Methods The setting was an 11-bed general intensive care unit in Sweden. An action research project was conducted to implement a clinical pathway for patients on mechanical ventilation. The project was managed by a local interprofessional core group and was externally facilitated by two researchers. Grounded theory was used by the researchers to explain the implementation process. The sampling in the study was purposeful and theoretical and included registered nurses (n31), assistant nurses (n26), anesthesiologists (n11), a physiotherapist (n1), first- and second-line managers (n2), and health records from patients on mechanical ventilation (n136). Data were collected from 2011 to 2016 through questionnaires, repeated focus groups, individual interviews, logbooks/field notes and health records. Constant comparative analysis was conducted, including both qualitative data and descriptive statistics from the quantitative data. Results A conceptual model of the clinical pathway implementation process emerged, and a central phenomenon, which was conceptualized as ‘Struggling for a feasible tool,’ was the core category that linked all categories. The phenomenon evolved from the ‘Triggers’ (‘Perceiving suboptimal practice’ and ‘Receiving external inspiration and support’), pervaded the ‘Implementation process’ (‘Contextual circumstances,’ ‘Processual circumstances’ and ‘Negotiating to achieve progress’), and led to the process ‘Output’ (‘Varying utilization’ and ‘Improvements in understanding and practice’). The categories included both facilitating and impeding factors that made the implementation process tentative and prolonged but also educational. Conclusions The findings provide a novel understanding of a bottom-up implementation of a clinical pathway in an intensive care context. Despite resonating well with existing implementation frameworks/theories, the conceptual model further illuminates the complex interaction between different circumstances and negotiations and how this interplay has consequences for the implementation process and output. The findings advocate a bottom-up approach but also emphasize the need for strategic priority, interprofessional participation, skilled facilitators and further collaboration.