The development of an Integrated Care Pathway for all patients with advanced life-limiting illness ? the Supportive Care Pathway

Main, Jill; Whittle, Claire; Treml, Jonathan; Woolley, J. C.; Main, A.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2934.2006.00706.x

Cited by 23 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Greenhalgh et al's (2004) model, support and advocacy from top management for the implementation process is vital for success. This was borne out in the literature, which showed that necessary resources were made available only with the approval or support of top management (Kitchiner & Bundred 1999;Jones & Johnstone 2004;Mellor et al 2004;Carr et al 2005;Ellershaw & Murphy 2005;Hockley et al 2005;Mirando et al 2005;Main et al 2006;Dawson et al 2007;Preston 2007;Taylor & Randall 2007;DHWA 2009;Edmonds et al 2009;Masso & McCarthy 2009).…”

Section: Theory Area 5: Resources (Context)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Realist Review of Key Factors Affecting the Successful Implementation and Sustainability of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient

McConnell¹,

O’Halloran²,

Porter³

et al. 2013

Worldviews Ev Based Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The implementation process recommended by the developers of the LCP is necessary but not sufficient to ensure successful implementation and sustainability of the pathway. The key components of the intervention (a dedicated facilitator, education and training, audit and feedback) must be configured to influence the beliefs of staff in relation to end of life care, and increase their motivation and self-efficacy in relation to using the LCP. The support of senior managers is vital to the release of necessary resources, and a dominant culture of cure, which sees every death as a failure, works against effective communication and collaboration in relation to the LCP.

show abstract

Section: Theory Area 5: Resources (Context)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Realist Review of Key Factors Affecting the Successful Implementation and Sustainability of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient

McConnell¹,

O’Halloran²,

Porter³

et al. 2013

Worldviews Ev Based Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The concept of 'preferred place of care' (irrespective of provider) is more important in longer term care planning for example in mental health 19 and end of life care. 20 On the face of it, the lack of a well-developed literature on the relationship between pathways and infrastructure seems like a strange omission. The concept of pathways invokes a geographical and spatial metaphor to understand health-care processes.…”

Section: Care Pathways and The Health Care-built Environmentmentioning

confidence: 96%

Care pathways and designing the health-care built environment: an explanatory framework

Davies¹,

Gray²

2009

International Journal of Care Pathways

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The built environment in which health and social care is delivered can have an impact on the efficiency and outcomes of care processes. The health-care estate is large and growing and is expensive to build, adapt and maintain. The design of these buildings is a complex, difficult and political process. Better use of care pathways as an input to the design and use of the built environment has the potential to deliver significant benefits. A number of variations on the idea of care pathways are already used in designing health-care buildings but this is under-researched. This paper provides a framework for thinking about care pathways and the health-care built environment. The framework distinguishes between five different pathway 'types' defined for the purpose of understanding the relationship between pathways and infrastructure. The five types are: 'care pathways', 'integrated care pathways', 'patient pathways', 'patient journeys' and 'patient flows'. The built environment implications of each type are discussed and recommendations made for those involved in either building development or care pathway projects.

show abstract

“…Within this context, the ICPAT has facilitated the development of the Supportive Care Pathway, an ICP for all patients with advanced life-limiting illness who are thought to be in the last year of life. 16 While the above indicates the translation of the development of ICPAT into the realities of developing ICPs, the potential contained within ICPAT has yet to be realized. The work of Vanhaecht et al 17 highlighted this potential, indicating within their evaluation how the ICPAT is the most appropriate clinical pathway audit tool to assess clinical pathway documents.…”

Section: The Icpat In Practicementioning

confidence: 97%

ICPAT: Integrated Care Pathways Appraisal Tool

Whittle

2009

International Journal of Care Pathways

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The development of an Integrated Care Pathway for all patients with advanced life-limiting illness ? the Supportive Care Pathway

Abstract: Unacceptable variations in care for those nearing the end of life is recognized. It is believed that the use of the Supportive Care Pathway may help to reduce that variation by identifying and supporting patients thought to be in the last year of their life.

Cited by 23 publications

References 9 publications

Systematic Realist Review of Key Factors Affecting the Successful Implementation and Sustainability of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient

Systematic Realist Review of Key Factors Affecting the Successful Implementation and Sustainability of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient

Care pathways and designing the health-care built environment: an explanatory framework

ICPAT: Integrated Care Pathways Appraisal Tool

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About