IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0180398.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Better organized care via care pathways: A multicenter study

Author

Listed:
  • Deborah Seys
  • Luk Bruyneel
  • Svin Deneckere
  • Seval Kul
  • Liz Van der Veken
  • Ruben van Zelm
  • Walter Sermeus
  • Massimiliano Panella
  • Kris Vanhaecht

Abstract

An increased need for efficiency and effectiveness in today’s healthcare system urges professionals to improve the organization of care. Care pathways are an important tool to achieve this. The overall aim of this study was to analyze if care pathways lead to better organization of care processes. For this, the Care Process Self-Evaluation tool (CPSET) was used to evaluate how healthcare professionals perceive the organization of care processes. Based on information from 2692 health care professionals gathered between November 2007 and October 2011 we audited 261 care processes in 108 organizations. Multilevel analysis was used to compare care processes without and with care pathways and analyze if care pathways led to better organization of care processes. A significant difference between care processes with and without care pathways was found. A care pathway in use led to significant better scores on the overall CPSET scale (p

Suggested Citation

  • Deborah Seys & Luk Bruyneel & Svin Deneckere & Seval Kul & Liz Van der Veken & Ruben van Zelm & Walter Sermeus & Massimiliano Panella & Kris Vanhaecht, 2017. "Better organized care via care pathways: A multicenter study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-11, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0180398
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180398
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0180398
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0180398&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0180398?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0180398. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.