A new efficient and integrated pathway for patient evaluation prior to atrial fibrillation ablation.

AIMS: In this quality improvement project, a care pathway for patients considered for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation was optimized with the goals to improve the patient journey and simultaneously integrate prospective data collection into the clinical process. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Lean Six Sigma approach was used to map the pre-existing process, identify constraints, and formulate countermeasures. The percentage of patients going through the full pre-ablation preparation that eventually underwent AF ablation, number of hospital visits and consultations, pathway compliance, and completeness of scientific data were measured before and after pathway optimization. Constraints in the process were (i) lack of standardized processes, (ii) inefficient use of resources, (iii) lack of multidisciplinary integration, (iv) lack of research integration, and (v) suboptimal communication. The impact of the corresponding countermeasures (defining a uniform process, incorporating 'go/no-go' moment, introducing a 'one-stop-shop', integrating prospective data collection, and improving communication) was studied for 33 patients before and 26 patients after pathway optimization. After optimization, the percentage of patients receiving a full pre-ablation preparation that eventually underwent AF ablation increased from 59% to 94% (P < 0.01). Fewer hospital visits (3.2 ± 1.2 vs. 2.3 ± 0.8, P = 0.01) and electrophysiologist consultations (1.8 ± 0.7 vs. 1.0 ± 0.3, P < 0.01) were required after pathway optimization. Pathway compliance and complete collection of scientific data increased significantly (3% vs. 73%, P < 0.01 and 15% vs. 73%, P < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: The optimization project resulted in a more efficient evaluation of patients considered for AF ablation. The new more efficient process includes prospective data collection and facilitates easy conduct of research studies focused on improvements of patient outcomes.

C-reactive protein point of care testing and physician communication skills training for lower respiratory tract infections in general practice: economic evaluation of a cluster randomized trial.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: An economic evaluation of general practitioner (GP) use of C-reactive protein (CRP) point of care test, GP communication skills training, and both GP use of CRP and communication skills training on antibiotic use for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) in general practice. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis with a time horizon of 28 days alongside a factorial, cluster randomized trial in 431 patients with LRTIs recruited by 40 GPs. INTERVENTIONS: usual care (control group), GP use of CRP point of care test, GP communication skills training, and both CRP use and communication skills training. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: health care costs. Cost-effectiveness, using the primary outcome measure antibiotic prescribing at index consultation, was assessed by incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). To adjust for skewed data and clustering, we used non-parametric bootstrapping re-sampling to derive percentile intervals for the mean difference in total costs and the mean difference in effectiveness between the groups. Various implementation scenarios according to GP preference were modelled with corresponding net monetary benefit (NMB) curves based on a given willingness-to-pay (λ) for a 1% lower antibiotic prescribing rate. RESULTS: The total mean cost per patient in the usual care group was €35.96 with antibiotic prescribing of 68%, €37.58 per patient managed by GPs using CRP tests (antibiotic prescribing 39%, ICER €5.79), €25.61 per patient managed by GPs trained in enhanced communication skills (antibiotic prescribing 33%, dominant) and €37.78 per patient managed by GPs using both interventions (antibiotic prescribing 23%, ICER €4.15). The interventions are cost-effective in any combination (yielding NMB at no willingness-to-pay), taking into account GPs' preferences where at least 15% of GPs chose to implement the communication skills training. CONCLUSIONS: The two strategies, both singly and combined, are cost-effective interventions to reduce antibiotic prescribing for LRTI, at no, or low willingness-to-pay. Taking GP preferences into account will optimize investment in strategies to reduce antibiotic prescribing for LRTI.