Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes ; 8(6): 634-48, 2015 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26432527
3.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 58(14): 1517-38, 2011 Sep 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21880456

RESUMEN

Consistent with the growing national focus on healthcare quality, the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Heart Association (AHA) have taken a leadership role over the past decade in developing measures of the quality of cardiovascular care by convening a joint ACCF/AHA Task Force on Performance Measures. The Task Force is charged with identifying the clinical topics appropriate for the development of performance measures and with assembling writing committees composed of clinical and methodological experts in collaboration with appropriate subspecialty societies. The Task Force has also created methodology documents that offer guidance in the development of process, outcome, composite, and efficiency measures. Cardiovascular performance measures using existing ACCF/AHA methodology are based on Class I or Class III guidelines recommendations, usually with Level A evidence. These performance measures, based on evidence-based ACCF/AHA guidelines, remain the most rigorous quality measures for both internal quality improvement and public reporting. However, many of the tools for diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular disease involve advanced technologies, such as cardiac imaging, for which there are often no underlying guideline documents. Because these technologies affect the quality of cardiovascular care and also have the potential to contribute to cardiovascular health expenditures, there is a need for more critical assessment of the use of technology, including the development of quality and performance measures in areas in which guideline recommendations are absent. The evaluation of quality in the use of cardiovascular technologies requires consideration of multiple parameters that differ from other healthcare processes. The present document describes methodology for development of 2 new classes of quality measures in these situations, appropriate use measures and structure/safety measures. Appropriate use measures are based on specific indications, processes, or parameters of care for which high level of evidence data and Class I or Class III guideline recommendations may be lacking but are addressed in ACCF appropriate use criteria documents. Structure/safety measures represent measures developed to address structural aspects of the use of healthcare technology (e.g., laboratory accreditation, personnel training, and credentialing) or quality issues related to patient safety when there are neither guidelines recommendations nor appropriate use criteria. Although the strength of evidence for appropriate use measures and structure/safety measures may not be as strong as that for formal performance measures, they are quality measures that are otherwise rigorously developed, reviewed, tested, and approved in the same manner as ACCF/AHA performance measures. The ultimate goal of the present document is to provide direction in defining and measuring the appropriate use-avoiding not only underuse but also overuse and misuse-and proper application of cardiovascular technology and to describe how such appropriate use measures and structure/safety measures might be developed for the purposes of quality improvement and public reporting. It is anticipated that this effort will help focus the national dialogue on the use of cardiovascular technology and away from the current concerns about volume and cost alone to a more holistic emphasis on value.


Asunto(s)
Comités Consultivos/normas , American Heart Association , Cardiología/normas , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/terapia , Estudios de Evaluación como Asunto , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/normas , Cardiología/métodos , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico , Fundaciones/normas , Humanos , Estados Unidos
4.
Circulation ; 124(13): 1483-502, 2011 Sep 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21875906

RESUMEN

Consistent with the growing national focus on healthcare quality, the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Heart Association (AHA) have taken a leadership role over the past decade in developing measures of the quality of cardiovascular care by convening a joint ACCF/AHA Task Force on Performance Measures. The Task Force is charged with identifying the clinical topics appropriate for the development of performance measures and with assembling writing committees composed of clinical and methodological experts in collaboration with appropriate subspecialty societies. The Task Force has also created methodology documents that offer guidance in the development of process, outcome, composite, and efficiency measures. Cardiovascular performance measures using existing ACCF/AHA methodology are based on Class I or Class III guidelines recommendations, usually with Level A evidence. These performance measures, based on evidence-based ACCF/AHA guidelines, remain the most rigorous quality measures for both internal quality improvement and public reporting. However, many of the tools for diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular disease involve advanced technologies, such as cardiac imaging, for which there are often no underlying guideline documents. Because these technologies affect the quality of cardiovascular care and also have the potential to contribute to cardiovascular health expenditures, there is a need for more critical assessment of the use of technology, including the development of quality and performance measures in areas in which guideline recommendations are absent. The evaluation of quality in the use of cardiovascular technologies requires consideration of multiple parameters that differ from other healthcare processes. The present document describes methodology for development of 2 new classes of quality measures in these situations, appropriate use measures and structure/safety measures. Appropriate use measures are based on specific indications, processes, or parameters of care for which high level of evidence data and Class I or Class III guideline recommendations may be lacking but are addressed in ACCF appropriate use criteria documents. Structure/safety measures represent measures developed to address structural aspects of the use of healthcare technology (e.g., laboratory accreditation, personnel training, and credentialing) or quality issues related to patient safety when there are neither guidelines recommendations nor appropriate use criteria. Although the strength of evidence for appropriate use measures and structure/safety measures may not be as strong as that for formal performance measures, they are quality measures that are otherwise rigorously developed, reviewed, tested, and approved in the same manner as ACCF/AHA performance measures. The ultimate goal of the present document is to provide direction in defining and measuring the appropriate use-avoiding not only underuse but also overuse and misuse-and proper application of cardiovascular technology and to describe how such appropriate use measures and structure/safety measures might be developed for the purposes of quality improvement and public reporting. It is anticipated that this effort will help focus the national dialogue on the use of cardiovascular technology and away from the current concerns about volume and cost alone to a more holistic emphasis on value.


Asunto(s)
Cardiología/normas , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/terapia , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Cardiovascular/normas , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud/métodos , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud/normas , American Heart Association , Humanos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto/normas , Estados Unidos
5.
Heart Rhythm ; 2(8): 844-8, 2005 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16051122

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Placement of electrophysiology catheters and pacing leads in the coronary sinus is challenging in some patients, particularly those with dilated cardiomyopathy. We hypothesized that cannulation of the coronary sinus and its branches can be facilitated by direct visualization. This study reports our experience with navigation into and within the coronary sinus in a closed-chest animal preparation, using a flexible steerable fiberoptic infrared endoscope that allows visualization through flowing blood. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of direct visualization of endocardial structures through infrared endoscopy. METHODS: Internal jugular venous access was obtained in 10 healthy mongrel dogs (weight 35-45 kg). The infrared endoscope (2900 fiber imaging bundle, wavelength 1,620 nm, frame rate 10-30/s, 320 x 256 pixels) was advanced to the coronary sinus ostium and branches by direct visualization of anatomic landmarks, such as the tricuspid valve and inferior vena cava. Localization was confirmed by fluoroscopy, contrast injection, and pathologic examination. RESULTS: Structures such as the tricuspid valve and inferior vena cava were visualized at distances of 1 to 2 cm, allowing successful coronary sinus identification and engagement in all 10 dogs. Coronary sinus branch images closely resembled pathologic findings. CONCLUSION: Direct visualization of the coronary sinus ostium and branches is possible through infrared endoscopy. This technique likely will facilitate coronary sinus engagement and navigation for pacing lead and catheter placement.


Asunto(s)
Angioscopía/métodos , Técnicas Electrofisiológicas Cardíacas/instrumentación , Endoscopios , Rayos Infrarrojos , Válvula Tricúspide/fisiología , Vena Cava Inferior/fisiología , Animales , Cateterismo Cardíaco , Perros , Estudios de Factibilidad , Tecnología de Fibra Óptica
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA