The impact of clinical pathways on the practice of head and neck oncologic surgery: The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience

Amy Y. Chen, David Callender, Carol Mansyur, Kim M. Reyna, Ellen Limitone, Helmuth Goepfert

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

43 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To assess the impact of clinical pathways on the practice of head and neck oncologic surgery in an academic center. Design: Cross- sectional study. Setting: Cancer treatment center. Patients: The study population consisted of 3 groups of patients who underwent unilateral neck dissection and were treated in the Department of Head and Neck Surgery of the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston. Additional procedures which may have been performed were direct laryngoscopy, rigid esophagoscopy, and/or dental extractions. Ninety-six patients treated during 1993-1994 prior to the implementation of the clinical pathway (historical control group) were compared with 94 patients treated during 1996-1998, 64 who were not (contemporaneous nonpathway group) and 30 who were managed on the clinical pathway (pathway group). Patients from 1995 were excluded since the pathway was in the planning stages then. Main Outcome Measures: Median length of stay; median total costs of care. Results: The median length of hospital stay of the historical control, contemporaneous nonpathway, and pathway groups decreased from 4.0 to 2.0 days (P<.001). The total median costs of care were less in the pathway group as compared with the historical control group ($6227 and $8459, respectively, P<.001) and also less in the contemporaneous nonpathway group compared with the historical control group ($6885 and $8459, respectively, P<.001). Mean and median length of hospital stay and costs were lower in the pathway group as compared with the nonpathway group but not significantly (P = .11 and P = .07, respectively) The contemporaneous nonpathway and pathway groups did not differ in complications or readmissions. Conclusions: Development and implementation of this clinical pathway played a statistically significant role in decreasing length of hospital stay and total costs of care associated with neck dissection between nonpathway and pathway patients. Thus, a more cost- effective practice environment has resulted for all of our patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)322-326
Number of pages5
JournalArchives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
Volume126
Issue number3
StatePublished - Mar 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Critical Pathways
Length of Stay
Neck
Head
Neoplasms
Costs and Cost Analysis
Neck Dissection
Control Groups
Esophagoscopy
Tooth Extraction
Laryngoscopy
Hospital Costs
Cross-Sectional Studies
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

The impact of clinical pathways on the practice of head and neck oncologic surgery : The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. / Chen, Amy Y.; Callender, David; Mansyur, Carol; Reyna, Kim M.; Limitone, Ellen; Goepfert, Helmuth.

In: Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Vol. 126, No. 3, 03.2000, p. 322-326.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Chen, Amy Y. ; Callender, David ; Mansyur, Carol ; Reyna, Kim M. ; Limitone, Ellen ; Goepfert, Helmuth. / The impact of clinical pathways on the practice of head and neck oncologic surgery : The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. In: Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery. 2000 ; Vol. 126, No. 3. pp. 322-326.
@article{2b71d9b51998489192655334bea12988,
title = "The impact of clinical pathways on the practice of head and neck oncologic surgery: The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience",
abstract = "Objective: To assess the impact of clinical pathways on the practice of head and neck oncologic surgery in an academic center. Design: Cross- sectional study. Setting: Cancer treatment center. Patients: The study population consisted of 3 groups of patients who underwent unilateral neck dissection and were treated in the Department of Head and Neck Surgery of the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston. Additional procedures which may have been performed were direct laryngoscopy, rigid esophagoscopy, and/or dental extractions. Ninety-six patients treated during 1993-1994 prior to the implementation of the clinical pathway (historical control group) were compared with 94 patients treated during 1996-1998, 64 who were not (contemporaneous nonpathway group) and 30 who were managed on the clinical pathway (pathway group). Patients from 1995 were excluded since the pathway was in the planning stages then. Main Outcome Measures: Median length of stay; median total costs of care. Results: The median length of hospital stay of the historical control, contemporaneous nonpathway, and pathway groups decreased from 4.0 to 2.0 days (P<.001). The total median costs of care were less in the pathway group as compared with the historical control group ($6227 and $8459, respectively, P<.001) and also less in the contemporaneous nonpathway group compared with the historical control group ($6885 and $8459, respectively, P<.001). Mean and median length of hospital stay and costs were lower in the pathway group as compared with the nonpathway group but not significantly (P = .11 and P = .07, respectively) The contemporaneous nonpathway and pathway groups did not differ in complications or readmissions. Conclusions: Development and implementation of this clinical pathway played a statistically significant role in decreasing length of hospital stay and total costs of care associated with neck dissection between nonpathway and pathway patients. Thus, a more cost- effective practice environment has resulted for all of our patients.",
author = "Chen, {Amy Y.} and David Callender and Carol Mansyur and Reyna, {Kim M.} and Ellen Limitone and Helmuth Goepfert",
year = "2000",
month = "3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "126",
pages = "322--326",
journal = "JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery",
issn = "2168-6181",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The impact of clinical pathways on the practice of head and neck oncologic surgery

T2 - The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience

AU - Chen, Amy Y.

AU - Callender, David

AU - Mansyur, Carol

AU - Reyna, Kim M.

AU - Limitone, Ellen

AU - Goepfert, Helmuth

PY - 2000/3

Y1 - 2000/3

N2 - Objective: To assess the impact of clinical pathways on the practice of head and neck oncologic surgery in an academic center. Design: Cross- sectional study. Setting: Cancer treatment center. Patients: The study population consisted of 3 groups of patients who underwent unilateral neck dissection and were treated in the Department of Head and Neck Surgery of the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston. Additional procedures which may have been performed were direct laryngoscopy, rigid esophagoscopy, and/or dental extractions. Ninety-six patients treated during 1993-1994 prior to the implementation of the clinical pathway (historical control group) were compared with 94 patients treated during 1996-1998, 64 who were not (contemporaneous nonpathway group) and 30 who were managed on the clinical pathway (pathway group). Patients from 1995 were excluded since the pathway was in the planning stages then. Main Outcome Measures: Median length of stay; median total costs of care. Results: The median length of hospital stay of the historical control, contemporaneous nonpathway, and pathway groups decreased from 4.0 to 2.0 days (P<.001). The total median costs of care were less in the pathway group as compared with the historical control group ($6227 and $8459, respectively, P<.001) and also less in the contemporaneous nonpathway group compared with the historical control group ($6885 and $8459, respectively, P<.001). Mean and median length of hospital stay and costs were lower in the pathway group as compared with the nonpathway group but not significantly (P = .11 and P = .07, respectively) The contemporaneous nonpathway and pathway groups did not differ in complications or readmissions. Conclusions: Development and implementation of this clinical pathway played a statistically significant role in decreasing length of hospital stay and total costs of care associated with neck dissection between nonpathway and pathway patients. Thus, a more cost- effective practice environment has resulted for all of our patients.

AB - Objective: To assess the impact of clinical pathways on the practice of head and neck oncologic surgery in an academic center. Design: Cross- sectional study. Setting: Cancer treatment center. Patients: The study population consisted of 3 groups of patients who underwent unilateral neck dissection and were treated in the Department of Head and Neck Surgery of the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston. Additional procedures which may have been performed were direct laryngoscopy, rigid esophagoscopy, and/or dental extractions. Ninety-six patients treated during 1993-1994 prior to the implementation of the clinical pathway (historical control group) were compared with 94 patients treated during 1996-1998, 64 who were not (contemporaneous nonpathway group) and 30 who were managed on the clinical pathway (pathway group). Patients from 1995 were excluded since the pathway was in the planning stages then. Main Outcome Measures: Median length of stay; median total costs of care. Results: The median length of hospital stay of the historical control, contemporaneous nonpathway, and pathway groups decreased from 4.0 to 2.0 days (P<.001). The total median costs of care were less in the pathway group as compared with the historical control group ($6227 and $8459, respectively, P<.001) and also less in the contemporaneous nonpathway group compared with the historical control group ($6885 and $8459, respectively, P<.001). Mean and median length of hospital stay and costs were lower in the pathway group as compared with the nonpathway group but not significantly (P = .11 and P = .07, respectively) The contemporaneous nonpathway and pathway groups did not differ in complications or readmissions. Conclusions: Development and implementation of this clinical pathway played a statistically significant role in decreasing length of hospital stay and total costs of care associated with neck dissection between nonpathway and pathway patients. Thus, a more cost- effective practice environment has resulted for all of our patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034014341&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034014341&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 10722004

AN - SCOPUS:0034014341

VL - 126

SP - 322

EP - 326

JO - JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery

JF - JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery

SN - 2168-6181

IS - 3

ER -