Findings and lessons learnt implementing a cardiovascular disease quality improvement program in Australian primary care: a mixed method evaluation.

BACKGROUND: There are discrepancies between evidence-based guidelines for screening and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and implementation in Australian general practice. Quality-improvement (QI) initiatives aim to reduce these gaps. This study evaluated a QI program (QPulse) that focussed on CVD assessment and management. METHODS: This mixed-methods study explored the implementation of guidelines and adoption of a QI program with a CVD risk-reduction intervention in 34 general practices. CVD screening and management were measured pre- and post-intervention. Qualitative analyses examined participants' Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) goals and in-depth interviews with practice stakeholders focussed on barriers and enablers to the program and were analysed thematically using Normalisation Process Theory (NPT). RESULTS: Pre- and post-intervention data were available from 15 practices (n = 19,562 and n = 20,249, respectively) and in-depth interviews from seven practices. At baseline, 45.0% of patients had their BMI measured and 15.6% had their waist circumference recorded in the past 2 years and blood pressure, lipids and smoking status were measured in 72.5, 61.5 and 65.3% of patients, respectively. Most high-risk patients (57.5%) were not prescribed risk-reducing medications. After the intervention there were no changes in the documentation and prevalence of risk factors, attainment of BP and lipid targets or prescription of CVD risk-reducing medications. However, there was variation in performance across practices with some showing isolated improvements, such as recording waist circumference (0.7-32.2% pre-intervention to 18.5-69.8% post-intervention), BMI and smoking assessment. Challenges to the program included: lack of time, need for technical support, a perceived lack of value for quality improvement work, difficulty disseminating knowledge across the practice team, tensions between the team and clinical staff and a part-time workforce. CONCLUSION: The barriers associated with this QI program was considerable in Australian GP practices. Findings highlighted they were not able to effectively operationalise the intervention due to numerous factors, ranging from lack of internal capacity and leadership to competing demands and insufficient external support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Reference Number ( ACTRN12615000108516 ), registered 06/02/2015.

Time trends in stroke risk management among high-risk patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Australia between 2011-2019.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with stroke. Major changes to AF management recommendations in 2016-2018 advised that: 1. Stroke risk be estimated using the CHA2DS2-VA score; 2. Antiplatelet agents (APAs) do not effectively mitigate stroke risk; 3. Anticoagulation is prioritised above bleeding risk among high-risk patients; and 4. Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are used as first-line anticoagulants. Aim: To examine trends in stroke risk management among high-risk patients with non-valvular AF in Australia between 2011-2019. Method: De-identified data of patients were obtained from 164 separate general practices. Data included information on patient demographics, diagnoses, health risk factors and recent prescriptions. Patients with a diagnosis of non-valvular AF were identified and stroke risk was calculated by CHA2DS2-VA score. High risk patients (i.e. CHA2DS2-VA ≥ 2) were categorised as being managed by oral anticoagulants (OACs, i.e., warfarin or NOACs), APAs only, or neither (i.e., no OACs or APAs) and time trends in prescribing were examined. Multivariate analyses examined the characteristics of patients receiving the guideline recommended OAC management. Results: Data were available for 337,964 patients; 8696 (2.6 %) had AF. Most patients with AF (85.8 %, n = 7116) had high stroke risk. The proportion of high-risk patients managed on OACs increased from 56.7 % in 2011 to 73.7 % in 2019, while the proportion prescribed APAs declined from 31.1 % to 14.0 %. Those receiving neither treatment remained steady (around 12 %). Overall, 26.3 % of patients were inadequately anticoagulated at the end of the study period. There were no age or gender differences in receiving the guideline-recommended therapy, and patients with comorbidities associated with increased stroke risk were more likely to receive OAC therapy. Conclusions: Stroke risk management among patients with AF has improved between 2011-2019, however there is still scope for further gains as many high-risk patients remain inadequately anticoagulated. Better stroke risk assessment by clinicians coupled with addressing practitioner concerns about bleeding risk may improve management of high-risk patients.

Learning from the implementation of a quality improvement intervention in Australian general practice: a qualitative analysis of participants views of a CVD preventive care project.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement collaborative projects aim to reduce gaps in clinical care provided in the healthcare system. This study evaluated the experience of key participants from a Quality Improvement Program (QPulse) that focussed on cardiovascular disease assessment and management. The study goal was to identify critical barriers and factors enabling the implementation of a quality improvement framework in Australian general practice. METHODS: This qualitative study examined in-depth semi-structured interviews with nineteen purposively-selected participants of the QPulse project. Interviewees were from General Practices and the local supporting organisation, a Primary Health Network. Interviews were analysed thematically using the Complex Systems Improvement framework, focusing on five domains: strategy, culture, structure, workforce and technology. RESULTS: Despite reported engagement with QPulse objectives to improve cardiovascular preventive care, implementation barriers associated with this program were considerable for all interviewees. Adoption of the quality improvement process was reliant on designated leadership, aligned practice culture, organised systems for clear communication, tailored education and utilisation of clinical audit and review processes. Rather than practice size and location, practice culture and governance alignment to quality improvement predicted successful implementation. Financial incentives for both general practice and the Primary Health Network were also identified as prerequisites for systematised quality improvement projects in the future, along with individualised support and education for each general practice. Technology was both an enabler and a barrier, and the Primary Health Network was seen as key to assisting the successful utilisation of the available tools. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of Quality Improvement programs remains a potential tool for achieving better health outcomes in General Practice. However, enablers such as financial incentives, individualised education and support provided via a supporting organisation, and IT tools and support are crucial if the full potential of Quality Improvement programs are to be realised in the Australian healthcare setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12615000108516 , UTN U1111-1163-7995.