• S Wilson, J Bin, J Sesperez, M Seger, and M Sugrue.
• Trauma Department, Liverpool Hospital, Locked Bag 7017, NSW 1871, Liverpool BC, Australia.
• Injury. 2001 Sep 1;32(7):525-32.

AbstractThis study prospectively evaluated the appropriateness and ability of clinical pathways to fit trauma patients in five key conditions, severe head injury, fractured ribs, fractured pelvis, fractured femur and blunt abdominal trauma, who were admitted to a single Level 1 Trauma Centre, between February and July 1999. Each pathway consisted of 14 elements of care divided into observable outcomes. Failure to achieve an outcome resulted in a variance or deviation from the pathway, which was assessed by the number of non-applicable variances. Appropriateness of clinical pathways was assessed by the applicability index (the number of non-applicable variances divided by the potential variances). Critical mismatches occurred when non-applicable variances exceeded 50% of potential variances. 146 patients, with the mean age 41.9 years (S.D. 20.7), mean ISS 11.1 (S.D. 10.7) were enrolled; 18 with severe head injury, 59 with fractured ribs, 13 with fractured pelvis, 20 with fractured femur and 36 with blunt abdominal trauma. Critical mismatch occurred in seven patients. Applicability indexes were 87 for head, 93 for ribs, 92 for blunt abdominal trauma, 91 for femur and 92 for the pelvic pathway. Patient assessment, pain management, skin integrity and patient education were the most appropriate key elements of care, discharge planning, patient satisfaction, treatment and activity were least applicable. This study identified, for the first time, that clinical pathways are clinically appropriate for major trauma conditions.

30 keywords...

hide…