Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jul 10;24(1):793.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11239-x.

Development and validity testing of a matrix to evaluate maturity of clinical pathways: a case study in Saskatchewan, Canada

Affiliations

Development and validity testing of a matrix to evaluate maturity of clinical pathways: a case study in Saskatchewan, Canada

Crystal Lynn Larson et al. BMC Health Serv Res. .

Abstract

Background: Healthcare systems are transforming into learning health systems that use data-driven and research-informed approaches to achieve continuous improvement. One of these approaches is the use of clinical pathways, which are tools to standardize care for a specific population and improve healthcare quality. Evaluating the maturity of clinical pathways is necessary to inform pathway development teams and health system decision makers about required pathway revisions or implementation supports. In an effort to improve the development, implementation, and sustainability of provincial clinical pathways, we developed a clinical pathways maturity evaluation matrix. To explore the initial content and face validity of the matrix, we used it to evaluate a case pathway within a provincial health authority in Saskatchewan, Canada.

Methods: By using iterative consensus-based processes, we gathered feedback from stakeholders including patient and family partners, policy makers, clinicians, and quality improvement specialists, to rank, retain, or remove enablers and sub-enablers of the draft matrix. We tested the matrix on the Chronic Pain Pathway (CPP) for primary care in a local pilot area and revised the matrix based on feedback from the CPP development team leader.

Results: The final matrix contains five enablers (i.e., Design, Ownership and Performer, Infrastructure, Performance Management, and Culture), 20 sub-enablers, and three trajectory definitions for each sub-enabler. Supplemental documents were created for six sub-enablers. The CPP scored 15 out of 40 possible points of maturity. Although the pathway scored highest in the Design enabler (10/12), it requires more attention in several areas, specifically the Ownership and Performer and the Performance Management enablers, each of which scored zero. Additionally, the Infrastructure and Culture enablers scored 2/4 and 3/8 points, respectively. These areas of the CPP are in need of improvement in order to enhance the overall maturity of the CPP.

Conclusions: We developed a clinical pathways maturity matrix to evaluate the various dimensions of clinical pathways' development and implementation. The goals of this initial work were to develop and validate a tool to assess the maturity and readiness of new or existing pathways and to track pathways' revisions and improvements.

Keywords: Clinical pathways; Evaluation; Maturity matrix; Measurement; Quality improvement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Development of maturity matrix and iterative consensus-based processes

References

    1. Menear M, Blanchette MA, Demers-Payette O, Roy D. A framework for value-creating learning health systems. Health Res Policy Syst. 2019;17(1):79. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0477-3. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Committee on the Learning Health Care System in America, Institute of Medicine. Best Care at Lower Cost: The Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America. Smith M, Saunders R, Stuckhardt L, McGinnis JM, editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2013. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK207225/. Cited 2023 May 3. - PubMed
    1. Friedman C, Rubin J, Brown J, Buntin M, Corn M, Etheredge L, et al. Toward a science of learning systems: a research agenda for the high-functioning Learning Health System. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015;22(1):43–50. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002977. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Allen C, Coleman K, Mettert K, Lewis C, Westbrook E, Lozano P. A roadmap to operationalize and evaluate impact in a learning health system. Learn Health Syst. 2021;5(4):e10258. doi: 10.1002/lrh2.10258. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Foley T, Vale L. A framework for understanding, designing, developing and evaluating learning health systems. Learn Health Syst. 2023;7(1):e10315. doi: 10.1002/lrh2.10315. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources