Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 2.379
Filter
Add more filters

Publication year range
1.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 24(1): 302, 2024 Jun 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38877422

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of deaths and disability worldwide. Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) effectively reduces the risk of future cardiac events and is strongly recommended in international clinical guidelines. However, CR program quality is highly variable with divergent data systems, which, when combined, potentially contribute to persistently low completion rates. The QUality Improvement in Cardiac Rehabilitation (QUICR) trial aims to determine whether a data-driven collaborative quality improvement intervention delivered at the program level over 12 months: (1) increases CR program completion in eligible patients with CHD (primary outcome), (2) reduces hospital admissions, emergency department presentations and deaths, and costs, (3) improves the proportion of patients receiving guideline-indicated CR according to national and international benchmarks, and (4) is feasible and sustainable for CR staff to implement routinely. METHODS: QUICR is a multi-centre, type-2, hybrid effectiveness-implementation cluster-randomized controlled trial (cRCT) with 12-month follow-up. Eligible CR programs (n = 40) and the individual patient data within them (n ~ 2,000) recruited from two Australian states (New South Wales and Victoria) are randomized 1:1 to the intervention (collaborative quality improvement intervention that uses data to identify and manage gaps in care) or control (usual care with data collection only). This sample size is required to achieve 80% power to detect a difference in completion rate of 22%. Outcomes will be assessed using intention-to-treat principles. Mixed-effects linear and logistic regression models accounting for clusters within allocated groupings will be applied to analyse primary and secondary outcomes. DISCUSSION: Addressing poor participation in CR by patients with CHD has been a longstanding challenge that needs innovative strategies to change the status-quo. This trial will harness the collaborative power of CR programs working simultaneously on common problem areas and using local data to drive performance. The use of data linkage for collection of outcomes offers an efficient way to evaluate this intervention and support the improvement of health service delivery. ETHICS: Primary ethical approval was obtained from the Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/ETH01093), along with site-specific governance approvals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12623001239651 (30/11/2023) ( https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=386540&isReview=true ).


Subject(s)
Cardiac Rehabilitation , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Quality Improvement , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Humans , Quality Improvement/standards , Cardiac Rehabilitation/standards , Treatment Outcome , Time Factors , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , New South Wales , Cooperative Behavior , Victoria , Coronary Disease/rehabilitation , Coronary Disease/diagnosis , Guideline Adherence/standards , Health Care Costs
2.
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis ; 33(6): 107639, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38369165

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Despite global progress in stroke care, challenges persist, especially in Low- and Middle-Income countries (LMIC). The Middle East and North Africa Stroke and Interventional Neurotherapies Organization (MENA-SINO) Stroke Program Accreditation Initiative aims to improve stroke care regionally. MATERIAL & METHOD: A 2022 survey assessed stroke unit readiness in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) + region, revealing significant regional disparities in stroke care between high-income and low-income countries. Additionally, it demonstrated interest in the accreditation procedure and suggested that regional stroke program accreditation will improve stroke care for the involved centers. CONCLUSION: An accreditation program that is specifically tailored to the regional needs in the MENA + countries might be the solution. In this brief review, we will discuss potential challenges faced by such a program and we will put forward a well-defined 5-step accreditation process, beginning with a letter of intent, through processing the request and appointment of reviewers, the actual audit, the certification decisions, and culminating in granting a MIENA-SINO tier-specific certificate with recertification every 5 years.


Subject(s)
Accreditation , Stroke , Humans , Accreditation/standards , Stroke/therapy , Stroke/diagnosis , Middle East , Africa, Northern , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Healthcare Disparities/standards , Developing Countries , Health Care Surveys , Program Evaluation
3.
JAMA ; 329(21): 1840-1847, 2023 06 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37278813

ABSTRACT

Importance: US hospitals report data on many health care quality metrics to government and independent health care rating organizations, but the annual cost to acute care hospitals of measuring and reporting quality metric data, independent of resources spent on quality interventions, is not well known. Objective: To evaluate externally reported inpatient quality metrics for adult patients and estimate the cost of data collection and reporting, independent of quality-improvement efforts. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective time-driven activity-based costing study at the Johns Hopkins Hospital (Baltimore, Maryland) with hospital personnel involved in quality metric reporting processes interviewed between January 1, 2019, and June 30, 2019, about quality reporting activities in the 2018 calendar year. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included the number of metrics, annual person-hours per metric type, and annual personnel cost per metric type. Results: A total of 162 unique metrics were identified, of which 96 (59.3%) were claims-based, 107 (66.0%) were outcome metrics, and 101 (62.3%) were related to patient safety. Preparing and reporting data for these metrics required an estimated 108 478 person-hours, with an estimated personnel cost of $5 038 218.28 (2022 USD) plus an additional $602 730.66 in vendor fees. Claims-based (96 metrics; $37 553.58 per metric per year) and chart-abstracted (26 metrics; $33 871.30 per metric per year) metrics used the most resources per metric, while electronic metrics consumed far less (4 metrics; $1901.58 per metric per year). Conclusions and Relevance: Significant resources are expended exclusively for quality reporting, and some methods of quality assessment are far more expensive than others. Claims-based metrics were unexpectedly found to be the most resource intensive of all metric types. Policy makers should consider reducing the number of metrics and shifting to electronic metrics, when possible, to optimize resources spent in the overall pursuit of higher quality.


Subject(s)
Hospitals , Public Reporting of Healthcare Data , Quality Improvement , Quality of Health Care , Humans , Delivery of Health Care/economics , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/standards , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/supply & distribution , Quality Improvement/economics , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Improvement/statistics & numerical data , Quality of Health Care/economics , Quality of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Adult , United States/epidemiology , Insurance Claim Review/economics , Insurance Claim Review/standards , Insurance Claim Review/statistics & numerical data , Patient Safety/economics , Patient Safety/standards , Patient Safety/statistics & numerical data , Economics, Hospital/statistics & numerical data
4.
Gastroenterology ; 161(2): 701-711, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34334168

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association Institute Clinical Practice Update was to review the available evidence and provide best practice advice regarding strategies to improve the quality of screening and surveillance colonoscopy. This review is framed around 15 best practice advice statements regarding colonoscopy quality that were agreed upon by the authors, based on a review of the available evidence and published guidelines. This is not a formal systematic review and thus no formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of recommendation has been carried out.


Subject(s)
Colonoscopy/standards , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Gastroenterology/standards , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Benchmarking , Colorectal Neoplasms/mortality , Colorectal Neoplasms/therapy , Consensus , Evidence-Based Medicine/standards , Humans , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Time Factors
5.
Health Expect ; 25(4): 1563-1579, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35472122

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The capability of consumers and staff may be critical for authentic and effective partnerships in healthcare quality improvement (QI). Capability frameworks describe core knowledge, skills, values, attitudes, and behaviours and guide learning and development at individual and organizational levels. OBJECTIVE: To refine a capability framework for successful partnerships in healthcare QI which was coproduced from a scoping review. DESIGN: A two-round eDelphi design was used. The International Expert Panel rated the importance of framework items in supporting successful QI partnerships, and suggested improvements. They also rated implementation options and commented on the influence of context. PARTICIPANTS: Seven Research Advisory Group members were recruited to support the research team. The eDelphi panel included 53 people, with 44 (83%) and 42 (77. 8%) participating in rounds 1 and 2, respectively. They were from eight countries and had diverse backgrounds. RESULTS: The Research Advisory Group and panel endorsed the framework and summary diagram as valuable resources to support the growth of authentic and meaningful partnerships in QI across healthcare contexts, conditions, and countries. A consensus was established on content and structure. Substantial rewording included a stronger emphasis on growth, trust, respect, inclusivity, diversity, and challenging the status quo. The final capability development framework included three domains: Personal Attributes, Relationships and Communication, and Principles and Practices. The Equalizing Decision Making, Power, and Leadership capability was foundational and positioned across all domains. Ten capabilities with twenty-seven capability descriptions were also included. The Principles and Practices domain, Equalizing Decision Making, Power, and Leadership capability, and almost half (44.4%) of the capability descriptions were rated as more important for staff than consumers (p < .01). However, only the QI processes and practices capability description did not meet the inclusion threshold for consumers. Thus, the framework was applicable to staff and consumers. CONCLUSION: The refined capability development framework provides direction for planning and provision of learning and development regarding QI partnerships. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Two consumers were full members of the research team and are coauthors. A Research Advisory Group, inclusive of consumers, guided study execution and translation planning. More than half of the panel were consumers.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Quality Improvement , Attitude of Health Personnel , Community Participation , Cooperative Behavior , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Health Facilities , Humans , Leadership , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality of Health Care/organization & administration , Quality of Health Care/standards
6.
JAMA ; 328(16): 1616-1623, 2022 10 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36282256

ABSTRACT

Importance: Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCI-A) is a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) initiative that aims to produce financial savings by incentivizing decreases in clinical spending. Incentives consist of financial bonuses from CMS to hospitals or penalties paid by hospitals to CMS. Objective: To investigate the association of hospital participation in BPCI-A with spending, and to characterize hospitals receiving financial bonuses vs penalties. Design, Setting, and Participants: Difference-in-differences and cross-sectional analyses of 4 754 139 patient episodes using 2013-2019 US Medicare claims at 694 participating and 2852 nonparticipating hospitals merged with hospital and market characteristics. Exposures: BPCI-A model years 1 and 2 (October 1, 2018, through December 31, 2019). Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospitals' per-episode spending, CMS gross and net spending, and the incentive allocated to each hospital. Results: The study identified 694 participating hospitals. The analysis observed a -$175 change in mean per-episode spending (95% CI, -$378 to $28) and an aggregate spending change of -$75.1 million (95% CI, -$162.1 million to $12.0 million) across the 428 670 episodes in BPCI-A model years 1 and 2. However, CMS disbursed $354.3 million (95% CI, $212.0 million to $496.0 million) more in bonuses than it received in penalties. Hospital participation in BPCI-A was associated with a net loss to CMS of $279.2 million (95% CI, $135.0 million to $423.0 million). Hospitals in the lowest quartile of Medicaid days received a mean penalty of $0.41 million; (95% CI, $0.09 million to $0.72 million), while those in the highest quartile received a mean bonus of $1.57 million; (95% CI, $1.09 million to $2.08 million). Similar patterns were observed for hospitals across increasing quartiles of Disproportionate Share Hospital percentage and of patients from racial and ethnic minority groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Among US hospitals measured between 2013 and 2019, participation in BPCI-A was significantly associated with an increase in net CMS spending. Bonuses accrued disproportionately to hospitals providing care for marginalized communities.


Subject(s)
Hospital Costs , Medicare , Motivation , Patient Care Bundles , Quality Improvement , Aged , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/standards , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Medicare/economics , Medicare/standards , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Patient Care Bundles/economics , Patient Care Bundles/standards , Patient Care Bundles/statistics & numerical data , Hospital Costs/statistics & numerical data , Quality Improvement/economics , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Improvement/statistics & numerical data , Social Marginalization
7.
Stroke ; 52(7): 2432-2435, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33966497

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) assess patients' perception of health care. We aimed to identify all reported PREMs for stroke care and critically appraise psychometric properties of PREMs validated for patients with stroke. METHODS: Studies on the development, validation, or utilization of PREMs for adult patients with stroke were systematically identified. The Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments criteria were used to appraise psychometric performance. RESULTS: We included 18 studies, examining 13 PREMs. Two PREMs had been developed for stroke care: Consumer Quality Index: Cerebrovascular Accident and Riksstroke. Consumer Quality Index: Cerebrovascular Accident was given a positive psychometric assessment, but its length and limited language applicability impede clinical implementation. Riksstroke was appraised as doubtful. Eleven PREMs were generic. The psychometric performance of 5 generic PREMS, validated for patients with stroke, received conflicting assessments. Six generic PREMs had not been validated in patients with stroke and were therefore not assessed for instrument performance. CONCLUSIONS: Thirteen PREMs have been published for use in stroke care. The stroke-specific Consumer Quality Index: Cerebrovascular Accident has favorable psychometric performance but lacks practical feasibility. Other PREMs have inadequate or unknown psychometric properties. This indicates the need for developing stroke-specific PREMs to support quality improvement and enhance patient-centered care.


Subject(s)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Patient Satisfaction , Patient-Centered Care/standards , Quality Improvement/standards , Stroke/therapy , Humans , Patient-Centered Care/methods , Stroke/psychology
8.
Br J Cancer ; 124(2): 313-314, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32989228

ABSTRACT

Shamash and colleagues describe how their supra-regional germ cell tumour multidisciplinary team achieved standardisation of treatment and improved survival. We discuss some of the insights the study provides into prioritising complex patients, streamlining processes, the use of telemedicine, and the centrality of good data collection to continuous quality improvement.


Subject(s)
Medical Oncology/methods , Medical Oncology/organization & administration , Medical Oncology/standards , Neoplasms, Germ Cell and Embryonal , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Quality Improvement/standards , Humans , Quality Assurance, Health Care/methods , Quality Assurance, Health Care/organization & administration , Quality Assurance, Health Care/standards
9.
Br J Cancer ; 124(2): 368-374, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32989229

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The germ cell supranetwork multidisciplinary team (SMDT) for the Anglian Network covers a population of 7.5 million. METHODS: We reviewed 10 years of SMDT discussion and categorised them into five domains ((1) overall outcome, (2) chemotherapy regimens-untreated disease and salvage therapy, (3) radiology, (4) pathology and (5) complex cases) to assess the impact of the SMDT. RESULTS: A total of 2892 new cases were reviewed. In the first 5 years, patients with good prognosis disease had poorer survival in low-volume vs high-volume centres (87.8 vs 95.3, p = 0.02), but the difference was no longer significant in the last 5 years (93.3 vs 95.1, p = 0.30). Radiology review of 3206 scans led to rejection of the diagnosis of progression in 26 cases and a further 10 cases were down-staged. There were 790 pathology reviews by two specialised uropathologists, which lead to changes in 75 cases. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18FDG) PET-CT was undertaken during this time period but did not help to predict who would have viable cancer. A total of 26 patients with significant mental health issues who were unable to give informed consent were discussed. CONCLUSION: SMDT working has led to an improvement in outcomes and refining of treatment in patients with germ cell tumours.


Subject(s)
Clinical Decision-Making/methods , Medical Oncology/methods , Medical Oncology/organization & administration , Medical Oncology/standards , Neoplasms, Germ Cell and Embryonal/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Patient Care Team/organization & administration , Patient Care Team/standards , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Quality Improvement/standards , Testicular Neoplasms/therapy
10.
Am J Kidney Dis ; 78(4): 511-519.e1, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33940114

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Hemodialysis facilities are high-risk environments for the spread of hepatitis C virus (HCV). Eliminating HCV from all dialysis facilities in a community may be achieved more effectively under a collaborative care model. STUDY DESIGN: Quality improvement study of multidisciplinary collaborative care teams including nephrologists, gastroenterologists, and public health practitioners. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: All dialysis patients in Changhua County, Taiwan were treated using an interdisciplinary collaborative care model implemented within a broader Changhua-Integrated Program to Stop HCV Infection (CHIPS-C). QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES: Provision of an HCV care cascade to fill 3 gaps, including screening and testing, diagnosis, and universal direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment implemented by collaborating teams of dialysis practitioners and gastroenterologists working under auspices of Changhua Public Health Bureau. OUTCOME: Outcome measures included quality indicators pertaining to 6 steps in HCV care ranging from HCV screening to treatment completion to cure. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: A descriptive analysis. RESULTS: A total of 3,657 patients from 31 dialysis facilities were enrolled. All patients completed HCV screening. The DAA treatment initiation rate and completion rate were 88.9% and 94.0%, respectively. The collaborative care model achieved a cure rate of 166 (96.0%) of 173 patients. No virologic failure occurred. The cumulative treatment ratios for patients with chronic HCV infection increased from 5.3% before interferon-based therapy (2017) to 25.6% after restricted provision of DAA (2017-2018), and then to 89.1% after universal access to DAA (2019). LIMITATIONS: Unclear impact of this collaborative care program on incident dialysis patients entering dialysis facilities each year and on patients with earlier stages of chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: A collaborative care model in Taiwan increased the rates of diagnosis and treatment for HCV in dialysis facilities to levels near those established by the World Health Organization.


Subject(s)
Hepatitis C/epidemiology , Hepatitis C/therapy , Intersectoral Collaboration , Renal Dialysis/methods , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/epidemiology , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Quality Improvement/standards , Renal Dialysis/standards , Taiwan/epidemiology
11.
J Vasc Surg ; 74(6): 2055-2062, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34186163

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Accurate documentation of patient care and acuity is essential to determine appropriate reimbursement as well as accuracy of key publicly reported quality metrics. We sought to investigate the impact of standardized note templates by inpatient advanced practice providers (APPs) on evaluation and management (E/M) charge capture, including outside of the global surgical package (GSP), and quality metrics including case mix index (CMI) and mortality index (MI). We hypothesized this clinical documentation initiative as well as improved coding of E/M services would result in increased reimbursement and quality metrics. METHODS: A documentation and coding initiative on the heart and vascular service line was initiated in 2016 with focus on improving inpatient E/M capture by APPs outside the GSP. Comprehensive training sessions and standardized documentation templates were created and implemented in the electronic medical record. Subsequent hospital care E/M (current procedural terminology codes 99231, 99232, 99233) from the years 2015 to 2017 were audited and analyzed for charge capture rates, collections, work relative value units (wRVUs), and billing complexity. Data were compared over time by standardizing CMS values and reimbursement rates. In addition, overall CMI and MI were calculated each year. RESULTS: One year following the documentation initiative, E/M charges on the vascular surgery service line increased by 78.5% with a corresponding increase in APP charges from 0.4% of billable E/M services to 70.4% when compared with pre-initiative data. The charge capture of E/M services among all inpatients rose from 21.4% to 37.9%. Additionally, reimbursement from CMS increased by 65% as total work relative value units generated from E/M services rose by 78.4% (797 to 1422). The MI decreased over the study period by 25.4%. Additionally, there was a corresponding 5.6% increase in the cohort CMI. Distribution of E/M encounter charges did not vary significantly. Meanwhile, the prevalence of 14 clinical comorbidities in our cohort as well as length of stay (P = .88) remained non-statistically different throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate clinical documentation of E/M care and ultimately inpatient acuity is critical in determining quality metrics that serve as important measures of overall hospital quality for CMS value-based payments and rankings. A system-based documentation initiative and expanded role of inpatient APPs on vascular surgery teams significantly improved charge capture and reimbursement outside the GSP as well as CMI and MI in a consistently complex patient population.


Subject(s)
Allied Health Personnel/economics , Documentation/economics , Health Care Costs , Insurance, Health, Reimbursement/economics , Patient Acuity , Patient Care Management/economics , Quality Assurance, Health Care/economics , Quality Indicators, Health Care/economics , Vascular Surgical Procedures/economics , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Allied Health Personnel/standards , Documentation/standards , Female , Health Care Costs/standards , Humans , Insurance, Health, Reimbursement/standards , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Care Management/standards , Quality Assurance, Health Care/standards , Quality Improvement/economics , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Retrospective Studies , United States , Vascular Surgical Procedures/standards
12.
Respir Res ; 22(1): 87, 2021 Mar 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33743704

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) has launched the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Quality Assessment Program (CQAP) since 2014. We aimed to reveal the influence of this national program on clinical outcomes and the burden of COPD in Korea. METHODS: The CQAP is conducted annually. We used healthcare claims data linked with the results of the program provided by HIRA between May 2014 and April 2017. Patients were considered to have COPD if they visited a hospital for COPD management during the assessment term. Those who visited a medical institution for COPD and were prescribed COPD medications at least twice were assessed by the CQAP (assessed subjects, AS; not-assessed subjects, NAS). CQAP evaluated the pulmonary function test conduction rate, regular visitation rate, and prescription rates of COPD medications. RESULTS: Among the 560,000 patients with COPD, about 140,000 were assessed by the CQAP annually. In both groups, the pulmonary function test conduction rate and inhaled bronchodilator prescription rate improved since 2014. Compared to the NAS group, the risk of admission and all-cause mortality rate in the AS group were significantly reduced by 21.2% and 40.7%, respectively. In patients who were assessed for 3 consecutive years, all of the above variables were high at baseline and were not improved much from implementation of CQAP. In matching analysis, we observed this improvement to be limited in the COPD quality assessment year. CONCLUSIONS: The CQAP by the health insurance bureau has improved the management protocol and prognosis of COPD.


Subject(s)
Bronchodilator Agents/administration & dosage , Lung/drug effects , National Health Programs/standards , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/drug therapy , Quality Assurance, Health Care/standards , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Administration, Inhalation , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Drug Prescriptions , Drug Utilization/standards , Female , Government Regulation , Humans , Lung/physiopathology , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , Program Evaluation , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/mortality , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/physiopathology , Republic of Korea/epidemiology , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
13.
Br J Anaesth ; 126(2): 404-414, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33213832

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We examined whether a context and process-sensitive 'intelligent' checklist increases compliance with best practice compared with a paper checklist during intensive care ward rounds. METHODS: We conducted a single-centre prospective before-and-after mixed-method trial in a 35 bed medical and surgical ICU. Daily ICU ward rounds were observed during two periods of 8 weeks. We compared paper checklists (control) with a dynamic (digital) clinical checklist (DCC, intervention). The primary outcome was compliance with best clinical practice, measured as the percentages of checked items and unchecked critical items. Secondary outcomes included ICU stay and the usability of digital checklists. Data are presented as median (interquartile range). RESULTS: Clinical characteristics and severity of critical illness were similar during both control and intervention periods of study. A total of 36 clinicians visited 197 patients during 352 ward rounds using the paper checklist, compared with 211 patients during 366 ward rounds using the DCC. Per ICU round, a median of 100% of items (94.4-100.0) were completed by DCC, compared with 75.1% (66.7-86.4) by paper checklist (P=0.03). No critical items remained unchecked by the DCC, compared with 15.4% (8.3-27.3) by the paper checklist (P=0.01). The DCC was associated with reduced ICU stay (1 day [1-3]), compared with the paper checklist (2 days [1-4]; P=0.05). Usability of the DCC was judged by clinicians to require further improvement. CONCLUSIONS: A digital checklist improved compliance with best clinical practice, compared with a paper checklist, during ward rounds on a mixed ICU. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03599856.


Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence , Checklist , Critical Care/standards , Decision Support Systems, Clinical , Intensive Care Units/standards , Paper , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , Teaching Rounds/standards , Attitude to Computers , Benchmarking/standards , Guideline Adherence/standards , Health Status , Humans , Length of Stay , Patient Safety , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Prospective Studies , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards
14.
J Asthma ; 58(7): 874-882, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32162561

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Enhancing Care for Patients with Asthma is a multi-state, multi-center quality improvement program developed to augment guideline-based practice among health care providers through Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. This study examined the association between the implementation of the guideline-based quality improvement program and subsequent changes in asthma-related emergency room visits and hospitalizations. METHODS: This retrospective, interrupted time-series study used administrative claims data from a private insurer that provided coverage to patients receiving care from participating health centers (15 centers in New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, and Illinois). The 12-month implementation period started in January 2013 for centers in Cohort 1 and October 2013 for centers in Cohort 2. The claims of 1,828 patients with asthma from January 2012 to May 2015 were analyzed. The data included 12-month pre-program implementation, 12-month program implementation, and 5-month post-program completion periods. RESULTS: The average number of asthma-related emergency room visits and hospitalizations decreased from 2.22 to 1.38 and 1.97 to 1.04 per 100 patients per month, respectively, in the 12-month pre-implementation period as compared to 12-month implementation period. The results of three-level generalized linear mixed models found that during the 12-month implementation period, patients had 37.7% and 47.1% lower rates of emergency room visits and hospitalizations, respectively, compared to the 12-month pre-implementation period (p < 0.001 in both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Enhancing Care for Patients with Asthma is an effective quality improvement program that was successfully executed in diverse geographical states and associated with reductions in potentially preventable health events. The findings support the widespread use of the program in other settings.


Subject(s)
Asthma/complications , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Guideline Adherence , Humans , Infant , Insurance Claim Review , Interrupted Time Series Analysis , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Quality Improvement/standards , Retrospective Studies , United States , Young Adult
15.
Anesth Analg ; 132(5): 1362-1377, 2021 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33177330

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this article is to provide a summary of the Enhanced Recovery After Cesarean delivery (ERAC) protocol written by a Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology (SOAP) committee and approved by the SOAP Board of Directors in May 2019. The goal of the consensus statement is to provide both practical and where available, evidence-based recommendations regarding ERAC. These recommendations focus on optimizing maternal recovery, maternal-infant bonding, and perioperative outcomes after cesarean delivery. They also incorporate management strategies for this patient cohort, including recommendations from existing guidelines issued by professional organizations such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Society of Anesthesiologists. This consensus statement focuses on anesthesia-related and perioperative components of an enhanced recovery pathway for cesarean delivery and provides the level of evidence for each recommendation.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Obstetrical/standards , Cesarean Section/standards , Enhanced Recovery After Surgery/standards , Cesarean Section/adverse effects , Consensus , Female , Humans , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Pregnancy , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
16.
Anesth Analg ; 132(2): 524-535, 2021 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32739955

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: "Macintosh"-videolaryngoscopes (VLs) are VLs that allow both direct and indirect laryngoscopy for intubation. We describe the decision-making and implementation-processes that our hospital used regarding the choice of device. We compared the performances of 4 Macintosh-VLs both in direct and indirect laryngoscopy. METHODS: A quality-improvement-project for airway management aiming at implementing Macintosh-VL for all intubation procedures performed in the operating room, involving 4 Macintosh-VLs (McGrath-Mac, C-MAC-S, C-MAC-S-Pocket-Monitor [PM], and APA). Three consecutive steps were described: (1) direct laryngoscopy with Macintosh-VL, (2) indirect laryngoscopy with Macintosh-VL (intubation attempt with Macintosh-style blade in case of Cormack I or II), (3) intubation attempt with hyperangulated blade in case of Cormack III/IV or failure of Macintosh-style blade. The main end point was the need to move to step III and use a hyperangulated blade. A mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to compare devices on the main end point while considering site as a random effect. Comparison of means was performed using analysis of variance and Tukey's test for multiple comparisons (number of laryngoscopy attempts, numeric rate scale [NRS] difficulty of intubation and NRS user-friendliness). Comparison of percentages was performed using a χ2 test for the need to move to step III and a Kruskal-Wallis test for the quality of image (bad, passable, good, very good, excellent). A P value ≤.008 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: From May to September 2017, 589 patients were included. Using the McGrath-Mac (22/180 [12%]) was associated with less use of hyperangulated blade than using the C-MAC-S (39/132 [30%], odds ratio [OR] [99.2% confidence interval {CI}] 0.34 [0.16-0.77], P = .0005), the APA (35/138 [25%], OR [99.2% CI] 0.42 [0.19-0.93]; P = .004), but not the C-MAC-S-PM (29/139 [21%], OR [99.2% CI] 0.53 [0.23-1.2]; P = .04).Overall, the number of intubation attempts was significantly lower using the McGrath Mac than the C-MAC-S or the C-MAC-S-PMVLs. Subjective appreciation of intubation difficulty and user-friendliness of the devices showed respectively lower and higher NRS scores for the McGrath-Mac compared to the other devices, whereas subjective assessment of image quality showed higher quality for the C-MAC-S and C-MAC-S-PM compared to the APA or McGrath-Mac. CONCLUSIONS: Among 4 single-use Macintosh-VLs, glottic visualization in direct and indirect laryngoscopy with the Macintosh-style blade was significantly improved with the McGrath-Mac compared to other Macintosh-VLs, leading to a less frequent need to resort to the hyperangulated blade and reduced overall number of intubation attempts.


Subject(s)
Intubation, Intratracheal/instrumentation , Laryngoscopes , Laryngoscopy/instrumentation , Operating Rooms , Quality Improvement , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Video Recording/instrumentation , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Intubation, Intratracheal/standards , Laryngoscopes/standards , Laryngoscopy/adverse effects , Laryngoscopy/standards , Male , Middle Aged , Operating Rooms/standards , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Video Recording/standards
17.
Anesth Analg ; 132(3): 890-898, 2021 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32665466

ABSTRACT

In the mid-1980s, the anesthesia departments at hospitals affiliated with Harvard Medical School were faced with a challenge: mounting medical malpractice costs. Malpractice insurance was provided by the Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO), a patient safety and medical malpractice insurance company owned by and providing service to the Harvard medical community. CRICO spearheaded an effort to reduce these costs and ultimately found a way to decrease the risks associated with anesthesia. Here, we chronicle events that led to the dramatic changes in medical practice that resulted from the activities of a small group of concerned anesthesiologists at Harvard-affiliated hospitals. We place these events in a historical perspective and explore how other specialties followed this example, and end with current strategies that minimize the risk associated with anesthesia. We conducted interviews with principals who formulated original standards of patient monitoring. In addition, we consulted documents in the public domain and primary source material. Efforts of these pioneers resulted in the establishment of the seminal Harvard-based anesthesia monitoring standards for minimal monitoring. What followed was an unprecedented transformation of the entire field. After the implementation of these standards at Harvard-affiliated hospitals, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) adopted "Standards for Basic Anesthetic Monitoring" for use during the administration of all anesthetics in the United States. Other nations have since adopted similar guidelines and these practices have resulted in significant improvements in patient safety. Currently, we estimate mortality due to anesthesia in healthy patients to be 1:400,000-perhaps as much as 10 times lower since the early 1980s. What began as an attempt to lower medical malpractice costs in a group of university hospitals became a worldwide effort that resulted in improvements in patient safety. Other specialties have adopted similar measures. Currently, an attitude and appreciation of safety are exemplified by several practices that include among others-the adherence to these patient safety guidelines, simulator training, the promulgation of standards and guidelines by ASA, and the use of a safety checklist before induction of anesthesia.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia Department, Hospital/standards , Anesthesia/standards , Anesthesiologists/standards , Monitoring, Intraoperative/standards , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , Anesthesia/adverse effects , Anesthesia/history , Anesthesia Department, Hospital/history , Anesthesiologists/history , Boston , Guideline Adherence/standards , History, 20th Century , History, 21st Century , Humans , Insurance, Liability , Malpractice , Monitoring, Intraoperative/history , Patient Safety/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/history , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors
18.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 5: CD007899, 2021 05 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33951190

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in paying for performance (P4P) as a means to align the incentives of healthcare providers with public health goals. Rigorous evidence on the effectiveness of these strategies in improving health care and health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is lacking; this is an update of the 2012 review on this topic. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of paying for performance on the provision of health care and health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and 10 other databases between April and June 2018. We also searched two trial registries, websites, online resources of international agencies, organizations and universities, and contacted experts in the field. Studies identified from rerunning searches in 2020 are under 'Studies awaiting classification.' SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized or non-randomized trials, controlled before-after studies, or interrupted time series studies conducted in LMICs (as defined by the World Bank in 2018). P4P refers to the transfer of money or material goods conditional on taking a measurable action or achieving a predetermined performance target. To be included, a study had to report at least one of the following outcomes: patient health outcomes, changes in targeted measures of provider performance (such as the delivery of healthcare services), unintended effects, or changes in resource use. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data as per original review protocol and narratively synthesised findings. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Given diversity and variability in intervention types, patient populations, analyses and outcome reporting, we deemed meta-analysis inappropriate. We noted the range of effects associated with P4P against each outcome of interest. Based on intervention descriptions provided in documents, we classified design schemes and explored variation in effect by scheme design. MAIN RESULTS: We included 59 studies: controlled before-after studies (19), non-randomized (16) or cluster randomized trials (14);  and interrupted time-series studies (9). One study included both an interrupted time series and a controlled before-after study. Studies focused on a wide range of P4P interventions, including target payments and payment for outputs as modified by quality (or quality and equity assessments). Only one study assessed results-based aid. Many schemes were funded by national governments (23 studies) with the World Bank funding most externally funded schemes (11 studies). Targeted services varied; however, most interventions focused on reproductive, maternal and child health indicators. Participants were predominantly located in public or in a mix of public, non-governmental and faith-based facilities (54 studies). P4P was assessed predominantly at health facility level, though districts and other levels were also involved. Most studies assessed the effects of P4P against a status quo control (49 studies); however, some studies assessed effects against comparator interventions (predominantly enhanced financing intended to match P4P funds (17 studies)). Four studies reported intervention effects against both comparator and status quo. Controlled before-after studies were at higher risk of bias than other study designs. However, some randomised trials were also downgraded due to risk of bias. The interrupted time-series studies provided insufficient information on other concurrent changes in the study context. P4P compared to a status quo control For health services that are specifically targeted, P4P may slightly improve health outcomes (low certainty evidence), but few studies assessed this. P4P may also improve service quality overall (low certainty evidence); and probably increases the availability of health workers, medicines and well-functioning infrastructure and equipment (moderate certainty evidence). P4P may have mixed effects on the delivery and use of services (low certainty evidence) and may have few or no distorting unintended effects on outcomes that were not targeted (low-certainty evidence), but few studies assessed these. For secondary outcomes, P4P may make little or no difference to provider absenteeism, motivation or satisfaction (low certainty evidence); but may improve patient satisfaction and acceptability (low certainty evidence); and may positively affect facility managerial autonomy (low certainty evidence). P4P probably makes little to no difference to management quality or facility governance (low certainty evidence). Impacts on equity were mixed (low certainty evidence). For health services that are untargeted, P4P probably improves some health outcomes (moderate certainty evidence); may improve the delivery, use and quality of some health services but may make little or no difference to others (low certainty evidence); and may have few or no distorting unintended effects (low certainty evidence). The effects of P4P on the availability of medicines and other resources are uncertain (very low certainty evidence). P4P compared to other strategies For health outcomes and services that are specifically targeted, P4P may make little or no difference to health outcomes (low certainty evidence), but few studies assessed this. P4P may improve service quality (low certainty evidence); and may have mixed effects on the delivery and use of health services and on the availability of equipment and medicines (low certainty evidence). For health outcomes and services that are untargeted, P4P may make little or no difference to health outcomes and to the delivery and use of health services (low certainty evidence). The effects of P4P on service quality, resource availability and unintended effects are uncertain (very low certainty evidence). Findings of subgroup analyses Results-based aid, and schemes using payment per output adjusted for service quality, appeared to yield the greatest positive effects on outcomes. However, only one study evaluated results-based aid, so the effects may be spurious. Overall, schemes adjusting both for quality of service and rewarding equitable delivery of services appeared to perform best in relation to service utilization outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base on the impacts of P4P schemes has grown considerably, with study quality gradually increasing. P4P schemes may have mixed effects on outcomes of interest, and there is high heterogeneity in the types of schemes implemented and evaluations conducted. P4P is not a uniform intervention, but rather a range of approaches. Its effects depend on the interaction of several variables, including the design of the intervention (e.g., who receives payments ), the amount of additional funding,  ancillary components (such as technical support) and contextual factors (including organizational context).


Subject(s)
Developing Countries , Quality Improvement/economics , Reimbursement, Incentive , Bias , Controlled Before-After Studies , Humans , Interrupted Time Series Analysis , Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality of Health Care/economics , Quality of Health Care/standards
19.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil ; 102(11): 2261-2268.e2, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33932358

ABSTRACT

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) treatment contains ambiguities across and within disciplines. This meta-synthesis of professional guidelines consolidates clinical treatment recommendations for CTS treatment and classifies them by strength of evidence. We conducted a search of Google, Google Scholar, and PubMed for published clinical treatment recommendations for CTS. A systematic hand search was completed to identify additional professional organizations with published recommendations. We extracted any mentioned treatment from all sources but developed our final consolidated clinical treatment recommendations only from select rigorous guidelines based on the Institute of Medicine (IOM) criteria for trustworthy guidelines. We translated rating systems of the primary guidelines into a universal rating system to classify recommendations for consolidated clinical treatment recommendations. Our search yielded 30 sources that mentioned a total of 55 CTS treatments. Six of the sources met the IOM inclusion criteria. These primary guidelines provided recommendations for 46 of the 55 treatments, which were consolidated into 12 broad treatment categories. Surgery, positioning, and steroids were strongly supported. Conservative treatments provided by rehabilitation professionals were conditionally supported. Pharmaceuticals, supplements, and alternative treatments were not generally supported. CTS is a complex condition with a wide variety of treatments provided by a multitude of disciplines. Our consolidated clinical treatment recommendations offer a comprehensive outline of available treatments for CTS and contributes to the process of developing best practices for its treatment.


Subject(s)
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Humans , Quality Improvement/standards , Societies, Scientific/standards
20.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 71: 237-248, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32771463

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study is to develop relevant quality indicators (QI) to monitor and improve quality of care in vascular surgery. METHODS: The Delphi method was used to incorporate expert opinion to reach consensus on a set of QI. A national expert panel consisting of 52 vascular surgeons was installed on a voluntary basis and endorsed by the Belgian Society of Vascular Surgery and the Flemish Hospital Network KU Leuven. A task force team consisting of 12 surgeons was created to serve as a delegation of the expert panel to discuss and filter the obtained data from the different Delphi rounds. RESULTS: A total of 3 Delphi rounds were needed to reach consensus on a set of 20 QI. Each QI had a content validity index (using a 7-point Likert scale), a feasibility index, and a target level. Twelve outcome indicators and 8 process indicators on several vascular topics were selected: overall for all vascular treatments (n = 1), arterial occlusive disease in general (n = 3), arterial occlusive disease of the lower limbs (n = 4), arterial occlusive disease of the carotid arteries (n = 5), arterial aneurysm disease in general (n = 2), arterial aneurysm disease with endovascular treatment (n = 1), and venous disease (n = 4). CONCLUSIONS: This resulted in the successful identification of 20 validated and relevant vascular QI, focusing on arterial occlusive disease, arterial aneurysm disease, and venous disease. The next step in this project will be the performance of an implementation study.


Subject(s)
Endovascular Procedures/standards , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Vascular Diseases/surgery , Vascular Surgical Procedures/standards , Belgium , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Endovascular Procedures/adverse effects , Humans , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Quality Improvement/standards , Retreatment/standards , Treatment Outcome , Vascular Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Vascular Surgical Procedures/adverse effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL