Development and validation of potential structure indicators for evaluating antimicrobial stewardship programmes in European hospitals.

This study describes the development of structure indicators for hospital antimicrobial stewardship programmes and pilot validation across European hospitals. A multi-disciplinary panel from four European countries developed structure indicators in three steps: identification and listing of indicators, remote ranking of indicators using multi-criteria scoring, selection of indicators in a face-to-face consensus meeting. Additionally, the top-ten indicators were identified as a minimal set of key indicators. A survey was sent to the directors of antimicrobial stewardship programmes in European hospitals. The yes/no answers for the indicators were transformed into numbers in order to calculate the total scores. A list of 58 indicators was selected and categorised into the following topics: antimicrobial stewardship services (12 items), tools (16 items), human resources and mandate (6 items), health care personnel development (4 items), basic diagnostic capabilities (6 items), microbiological rapid tests (2 items), evaluation of microbiological drug resistance data (3 items), antibiotic consumption control (5 items) and drug use monitoring (4 items). The indicator scores, reported by 11 pilot hospitals from five European countries, ranged from 32 to 50 (maximum score = 58) and from 5 to 10 points (maximum score = 10) for, respectively, the complete and the top-ten list. An international panel selected 58 potential structure indicators, among which was a minimal set of ten key structure indicators, that could be useful for assessment of the comprehensiveness and resource-intensity of antimicrobial stewardship programmes. There was significant heterogeneity among participating centres with regard to their score for structural components of effective antimicrobial stewardship.

Prospective multicentre feasibility study of a quality of care indicator for intravenous to oral switch therapy with highly bioavailable antibiotics.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced oral (po) bioavailability of antimicrobial drugs allows conversion to po therapy once a patient meets defined clinical criteria. This can reduce length of hospital stay, healthcare costs and risk of complications related to intravenous (iv) access. We developed a quality indicator for assessing the appropriate iv-to-po switch of bioavailable antibiotics and evaluated its feasibility and clinical relevance across acute healthcare systems. METHODS: The study was designed as a multicentre, multinational observational audit. The indicator was the proportion of inappropriate iv treatments at any point in time in adult patients treated with fluoroquinolones, clindamycin, linezolid or metronidazole. Treatments were prospectively evaluated by a trained physician or clinical pharmacist using predefined clinical criteria. The feasibility of the indicator was evaluated by measuring data availability, data collection workload and sensitivity to improvement RESULTS: Data were collected over a 3 month period in five university hospitals in Austria, Belgium and Germany and iv treatment was assessed in 211 patients. The indicator was measurable in 99.1% of cases. By intention-to-treat analysis, 37.0% (95% CI 30.5-43.9) of treatments were inappropriate, ranging from 17.5% to 53.8% across hospitals. The median time needed for case assessment and documentation was 29 min. CONCLUSIONS: This quality indicator was found to be generally feasible in hospitals across three European countries, and informative about the local need for clinical quality improvement.

The cost of prescription medicines to patients.

The study compares the cost-sharing (co-payment) arrangements for prescribed medicines in a sample of EU countries. Through a set of typical prescription scenarios, the cost burden to individual patients of prescriptions are examined, in the context of drug price, and from the perspective of therapeutic need. The cost to patients of medicines is consistently lower in some, and higher in other, countries, regardless of the type of prescription charge system. Fixed charge systems, as opposed to graduated co-payment systems, are obviously more likely to lead to similar charges for the treatment of comparable clinical conditions, but depending on the level of the charge, can result in the patient paying a higher charge than the price of the drug to the health organisation. Exemption from charges for prescription medicines, commonly relate to clinical condition and level of income. Some systems also have age-related criteria and apply ceilings to the total prescription cost burden borne by the patient. The impact on patient costs of specific policy formulations is discussed and a proposal is made for cost convergence for comparable therapies. The method used in this study may also provide a route for investigating model systems prior to implementation.

[Quality control in Austrian hospitals--results of evaluation]. / Qualitätssichernde Massnahmen in österreichischen Krankenanstalten. Ergebnisse einer Evaluierungsstudie.

The revision of the federal hospital act (Nov. 11, 1993; BGB1 Nr. 801/93) intends the introduction of an internal quality control as well as comparisons between different hospitals. For the application fo these constitutional requirements, the state governments had to develop laws being the basis for the hospital management to implement quality assurance. To support the introduction of a systematic quality control, the federal ministry of health published a guideline for quality assurance which was made available to all hospitals. Now, a questionnaire in all Austrian hospitals was designed to evaluate the progress and the specific ways of implementations as well as the possible need for action in the future.

Establishing the feasibility of cross-mapping independent child health data sets as a means of comparing health status and service quality.

Benefits of comparative data analysis for quality assurance and policy development are clear, but are difficult to establish through traditional means of prospective projects. This paper describes a pilot project to test an alternative method, namely seeking to identify areas of commonality amongst very different pre-existing data sets to provide a starting point. Advantages and disadvantages of this method, together with the critical factors identified in the pilot study, are described. Whilst developed in child health, the lessons learned are relevant for any other client groups.

[Quality assurance in endoprosthetics]. / Qualitätssicherung in der Endoprothetik.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the level of documentation as an instrument of ongoing quality management in arthroplasty, a questionnaire was created on this subject, which concentrated on structural and process indicators. METHODS: A total of 908 questionnaires was sent to orthopedic and trauma departments in Austria, Germany and Switzerland and were evaluated anonymously. RESULTS: The quota of return was 54% in Switzerland, 47% in Austria and 25% in Germany. The waiting period for an arthroplasty is much less in Switzerland and in Germany than in Austria. Only 40% of patients receive forms for informed consent. Documentation is seldomly standardized thus making comparison virtually impossible. Surgical planning is usually done with templates in Germany and Austria, in Switzerland with drawings. Prosthesis passports are predominately used by orthopedic departments. The data regarding complication rates and infections are not analyzed at regular intervals (max. 30%) and corrective measures are rarely implemented. CONCLUSION: Documentation is the basic instrument of quality management and requires completeness (totality) and plausibility of the datas. It is of great importance that evaluated data are analyzed and consequences are taken. The primary aim of quality assurance is to identify problems that adversely affect quality in order to develop and implement process sequences for the improvement of patient care and management.

Quality assurance in hip arthroplasty.

Documentation is key to quality assurance (QA): Data must be complete, plausible, and comparable, and then analyzed to implement corrective measures. Important factors are: qualification of care-providing staff, equipment and implants available (structural quality), effective scheduling of operations and therapy management (process quality), and patient status monitoring (outcome quality). The primary aim is to reveal deficits in process quality and develop and implement improvements in care. QA does not aim at exposing individual mistakes or flawed techniques; rather it is designed to analyze processes and treatments and implement specific solutions. An evaluation profile with the key quality indicators and a QA guideline is presented. A survey conducted in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland revealed: (1) up to 12-month waiting period for surgery in 6%, (2) only 40% written instructions, (3) data mostly written by hand, (4) differences in surgery planning and use of prosthesis passport, (6) inconsistent data analysis, (7) corrective measures rarely implemented.