Abstract
We evaluated whether is better to use Critical Path or not to use Critical Path by studying outcome management in the health care of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in our hospital. We studied the clinical outcome, hospital stay cost, length of hospital stay, and patient satisfaction. Regarding the clinical outcome, there was one patient with an umbilical wound infection in the Critical Path group. We suspect that insufficient umbilical treatment on the part of the medical staff was the cause of this. The length of hospital stay with the Critical Path group was almost the same as the control group. The varying factors were, a prolongation of hospital stay due to wound infection, patient uneasiness about leaving the hospital before the sutures were completely removed, the need of a decision on the date of discharge, and a shortening of the overall length of the hospital stay before the operation. In the Critical Path group the average hospital stay cost decreased 3.5% for total medical expenses and increased 4.0% for daily costs. We suspect that the cause of the decrease in expenses was the unification of drips and hematological examinations. Regarding patient satisfaction, the average Critical Path patient evaluation was over a score of 4, on a scale of 1 to 5, and more patients have had good motivation for recovery, for fighting further illness, and for receptiveness to treatment.
