The effectiveness of clinical pathway‐directed care on hospitalisation‐related outcomes in patients with severe traumatic brain injury: A quasi‐experimental study
Severe traumatic brain injury (STBI) is a major cause of disability and mortality in young adults. Clinical pathways endeavour to bring evidence and clinical practice closer together to foster the delivery of best practice and to improve patient outcomes.
To compare the effectiveness of clinical pathway directed care to usual care on hospitalisation-related outcomes in patients with STBI.
Quasi-experimental study.
The study was conducted in a trauma Intensive Care Unit of a large teaching hospital in Egypt. Patients aged 18-60 years with a diagnosis of STBI, a Glasgow Coma Scale score between 3 and 8 and a non-penetrating head injury, were consecutively assigned to 15 days of care. The outcomes assessed were complications related to hospitalization, clinical variances, length of ICU stay, ICU readmission rate, and patient/family satisfaction.
Sixty participants completed the study (30 in each arm). Apart from age, there were no significant differences between groups in baseline characteristics. The clinical pathway group demonstrated statistically significantly fewer cases of hospitalisation-related complications at day 15, and a significantly shorter length of ICU stay, lower ICU readmission rate, and a high level of patient/family satisfaction when compared with the usual care group. The effect of the intervention on fever, pressure ulceration, hyperglycaemia and re-admission to the ICU was no longer statistically significant after controlling for age.
The findings of the current study suggest that the implementation of a clinical pathway for patients with severe TBI may be helpful in improving the patient experience as well as some hospitalisation-related outcomes.
The provision of clinical pathway directed care in a trauma ICU may offer benefits to the patient, family and institution beyond that provided by usual care This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2025.
All research outputs
#7,817,055
of 26,844,720 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Nursing
#1,998
of 5,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,623
of 455,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Nursing
#61
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,844,720 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,718 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 455,435 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
