Dedicated spine trauma clinical quality registries: a systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Tee JW
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3854593 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Dedicated spine trauma clinical quality registries: a systematic review.
Tee Jin W JW Chan Patrick C H PC Rosenfeld Jeffrey V JV Gruen Russell L RL
Global spine journal 20130712 4
Study Design Systematic review. Objective We assessed the current state of spine registries by collecting spine trauma data and assessing their compliance to defined registry standards of being clinical quality. We ascertained if these registries collected spinal cord injury data alone or with spine column trauma data. Methods A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE and Embase databases for articles describing dedicated spinal cord and spine column databases published between January 199 ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesThe objective of this systematic review was to examine the existing evidence base for the cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit of clinical quality registries (CQRs).DesignSystematic review and narrative synthesis.Data sourcesNine electronic bibliographic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL, in the period from January 2000 to August 2019.Eligibility criteriaAny peer-reviewed published study or grey literature in English which had reported on an economic evaluation of one or more CQRs.Data extraction and synthesisData were screened, extracted and appraised by two independent reviewers. A narrative synthesis was performed around key attributes of each CQR and on key patient outcomes or changes to healthcare processes or utilisation. A narrative synthesis of the cost-effectiveness associated with CQRs was also conducted. The primary outcome was cost-effectiveness, in terms of the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), cost savings or return-on-investment (ROI) attributed to CQR implementation.ResultsThree studies and one government report met the inclusion criteria for the review. A study of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Programme (NSQIP) in the USA found that the cost-effectiveness of this registry improved over time, based on an ICER of US$8312 per postoperative event avoided. A separate study in Canada estimated the ROI to be US$3.43 per US$1.00 invested in the NSQIP. An evaluation of a post-splenectomy CQR in Australia estimated that registry cost-effectiveness improved from US$234?329 to US$18?358 per life year gained when considering the benefits accrued over the lifetime of the population. The government report evaluating five Australian CQRs estimated an overall return of 1.6-5.5 times the cost of investment.ConclusionsAvailable data indicate that CQRs can be cost-effective and can lead to significant returns on investment. It is clear that further studies that evaluate the economic and clinical impacts of CQRs are necessary.Prospero registration numberCRD42018116807.
| S-EPMC6924778 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical quality registries (CQRs) are playing an increasingly important role in improving health outcomes and reducing health care costs. CQRs are established with the purpose of monitoring quality of care, providing feedback, benchmarking performance, describing pattern of treatment, reducing variation and as a tool for conducting research.ObjectivesTo synthesise the impact of clinical quality registries (CQRs) as an 'intervention' on (I) mortality/survival; (II) measures of outcome that reflect a process or outcome of health care; (III) health care utilisation; and (IV) healthcare-related costs.MethodsThe following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL and Google Scholar. In addition, a review of the grey literature and a reference check of citations and reference lists within articles was undertaken to identify relevant studies in English covering the period January 1980 to December 2016. The PRISMA-P methodology, checklist and standard search strategy using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria and structured data extraction tools were used. Data on study design and methods, participant characteristics attributes of included registries and impact of the registry on outcome measures and/or processes of care were extracted.ResultsWe identified 30102 abstracts from which 75 full text articles were assessed and finally 17 articles were selected for synthesis. Out of 17 studies, six focused on diabetes care, two on cardiac diseases, two on lung diseases and others on organ transplantations, rheumatoid arthritis, ulcer healing, surgical complications and kidney disease. The majority of studies were "before after" design (#11) followed by cohort design (#2), randomised controlled trial (#2), experimental non randomised study and one cross sectional comparison. The measures of impact of registries were multifarious and included change in processes of care, quality of care, treatment outcomes, adherence to guidelines and survival. Sixteen of 17 studies demonstrated positive findings in their outcomes after implementation of the registry.ConclusionsDespite the large number of published articles using data derived from CQRs, few have rigorously evaluated the impact of the registry as an intervention on improving health outcomes. Those that have evaluated this impact have mostly found a positive impact on healthcare processes and outcomes.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42015017319.
| S-EPMC5591016 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Statins, in addition to their lipid-lowering properties, have anti-inflammatory actions. The aim of this review is to evaluate the effect of pre-injury statin use, and statin treatment following injury. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched to January 2012 for randomised and observational studies of statins in trauma patients in general, and in patients who have suffered traumatic brain injury, burns, and fractures. Of 985 identified citations, 7 (4 observational studies and 3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs)) met the inclusion criteria. Two studies (both observational) were concerned with trauma patients in general, two with patients who had suffered traumatic brain injury (one observational, one RCT), two with burns patients (one observational, one RCT), and one with fracture healing (RCT). Two of the RCTs relied on surrogate outcome measures. The observational studies were deemed to be at high risk of confounding, and the RCTs at high risk of bias. Three of the observational studies suggested improvements in a number of clinical outcomes in patients taking statins prior to injury (mortality, infection, and septic shock in burns patients; mortality in trauma patients in general; mortality in brain injured patients) whereas one, also of trauma patients in general, showed no difference in mortality or infection, and an increased risk of multi-organ failure. Two of three RCTs on statin treatment in burns patients and brain injured patients showed improvements in E-selectin levels and cognitive function. The third, of patients with radial fractures, showed no acceleration in fracture union. In conclusion, there is some evidence that pre-injury statin use and post-injury statin treatment may have a beneficial effect in patients who have suffered general trauma, traumatic brain injury, and burns. However, these studies are at high risk of confounding and bias, and should be regarded as 'hypothesisgenerating'. A well-designed RCT is required to determine the therapeutic efficacy in improving outcomes in this patient population.
| S-EPMC3706835 | biostudies-other
Project description:Many developed countries have regional and national clinical registries aimed at improving health outcomes of patients diagnosed with particular diseases or cared for in particular healthcare settings. Clinical quality registries (CQRs) are clinical registries established with the purpose of monitoring quality of care and providing feedback to improve health outcomes. The aim of this systematic review is to understand the impact of CQRs on (1) mortality/survival; (2) measures of outcome that reflect a process or outcome of healthcare; (3) healthcare utilisation and (4) costs.The PRISMA-P methodology, checklist and standard strategy using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and structured data abstraction tools will be followed. A search of the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and CINAHL will be undertaken, in addition to Google Scholar and grey literature, to identify studies in English covering the period January 1980 to December 2014. Case-control, cohort, randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials which describe the registry as an intervention will be eligible for inclusion. Narrative synthesis of study findings will be conducted, guided by a conceptual framework developed to analyse the outcome measure of the registry using defined criteria. If sufficient studies are identified with a similar outcome of interest and measure using the same comparator and time of interval, results will be pooled for random-effects meta-analysis. Test for heterogeneity and sensitivity analysis will be conducted. To identify reporting bias, forest plots and funnel plots will be created and, if required, Egger's test will be conducted.Ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. Review results will be published as a part of thesis, peer-reviewed journal and conferences.CRD42015017319.
| S-EPMC4853981 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundNational cardiac registries are increasingly used for informing health policy, improving the quality and cost-effectiveness of patient care, clinical research, and monitoring the safety of novel treatments. However, the quality of registries is variable. We aimed to assess the characteristics and quality of national cardiac registries across all subspecialties of cardiac care.MethodsPublications relating to national cardiac registries across six cardiac subspecialty domains were identified by searching MEDLINE and the Google advanced search function with 26 438 citations and 4812 full-text articles reviewed.ResultsA total of 155 registries, representing 49 countries, were included in the study. Of these, 45 related to coronary disease or percutaneous coronary intervention, 28 related to devices, arrhythmia, and electrophysiology, 24 related to heart failure, transplant, and mechanical support, 21 related to structural heart disease, 21 related to congenital heart disease, and 16 related to cardiac surgery. Enrollment was procedure-based in 60% and disease-based in 40%. A total of 73.10 million patients were estimated to have been enrolled in cardiac registries. Quality scoring was performed using a validated registry grading system, with registries performing best in the use of explicit variable definitions and worst in assessment of data reliability. Higher quality scores were associated with government funding, mandated enrollment, linkage to other registries, and outcome risk adjustment. Quality scores and number of registries within a country were positively correlated with each other and with measures of national economic output, health expenditure, and urbanization.ConclusionsThere has been remarkable growth in the uptake of national cardiac registries across the last few decades. However, the quality of processes used to ensure data completeness and accuracy remain variable and few countries have integrated registries covering multiple subspecialty domains. Clinicians, funders, and health policymakers should be encouraged to focus on the range, quality, and integration of these registries. Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42020204224.
| S-EPMC8452241 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo identify patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) in clinical quality registries, for people with cutaneous melanoma, to inform a new Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry; and describe opportunities and challenges of routine PROM/PREM collection, especially in primary care.DesignSystematic review.Primary and secondary outcome measuresWhich PROMs and PREMs are used in clinical quality registries for people with cutaneous melanoma, how they are collected, frequency of collection, participant recruitment methods and funding models for each registry.Results1134 studies were identified from MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects databases and TUFTS Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, alongside grey literature, from database inception to 5th February 2020. Following screening, 14 studies were included, identifying four relevant registries: Dutch Melanoma Registry, Adelphi Real-World Disease-Specific Programme (Melanoma), Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long-term Evaluation of Survivorship Registry, and Cancer Experience Registry. These used seven PROMs: EuroQol-5 Dimensions, Functional Assessment of Cancer-General (FACT-G) and FACT-Melanoma (FACT-M), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Cancer 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), Fatigue Assessment Scale Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information System-29 and one PREM; EORTC QLQ-Information Module 26. PROMs/PREMs in registries were reported to improve transparency of care; facilitate clinical auditing for quality assessment; enable cost-effectiveness analyses and create large-scale research platforms. Challenges included resource burden for data entry and potential collection bias toward younger, more affluent respondents. Feedback from patients with melanoma highlighted the relevance of PROMs/PREMs in assessing patient outcomes and patient experiences.ConclusionsClinical registries indicate PROMs/PREMs for melanoma care can be incorporated and address important gaps, however cost and collection bias may limit generalisability.Prospero registration numberCRD42018086737.
| S-EPMC7880114 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purpose - Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) has been debated since early studies showed poor implant survival. Recent studies show better results. This review reports failure modes for PFA and investigates differences in data reported from registries and clinical studies. Additionally, we report differences in failure modes among implant designs. Methods - A systematic search was performed in September 2018. All studies and registers describing failure modes of PFA were included and implant design was noted for each revision. Results - This review includes 1,299 revisions of a primary PFA reported in 47 clinical studies and 3 registers. The failure modes were: 42% OA progression, 16% pain, 13% aseptic loosening, 12% surgical error, 4% wear, 2% infection, 2% broken patellar component, 1% stiffness, 1% fracture, and 7% other. The data from registries and cohort studies differed statistically significantly in 7 out of 12 failure modes. Significant differences were found in several failure modes among implant designs. Interpretation - OA progression is the most common failure mode of PFA. There are significant differences in data on failure modes between registers and protocolled studies, notably for surgical error. The implant design significantly influences several of the failure modes. In conclusion, indication, surgical technique, and implant design are important for a successful PFA, and register-based failure modes should be interpreted with caution.
| S-EPMC6746256 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeWe performed a systematic review and a survey in order to (1) evaluate the evidence for the impact of spine registries on the quality of spine care, and with that, on patient-related outcomes, and (2) evaluate the methodology used to organize, analyze, and report the "quality of spine care" from spine registries.MethodsTo study the impact, the literature on all spinal disorders was searched. To study methodology, the search was restricted to degenerative spinal disorders. The risk of bias in the studies included was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Additionally, a survey among registry representatives was performed to acquire information about the methodology and practice of existing registries.Results4,273 unique references up to May 2014 were identified, and 1,210 were eligible for screening and assessment. No studies on impact were identified, but 34 studies were identified to study the methodology. Half of these studies (17 of the 34) were judged to have a high risk of bias. The survey identified 25 spine registries, representing 14 countries. The organization of these registries, methods used, analytical approaches, and dissemination of results are presented.InterpretationWe found a lack of evidence that registries have had an impact on the quality of spine care, regardless of whether intervention was non-surgical and/or surgical. To improve the quality of evidence published with registry data, we present several recommendations. Application of these recommendations could lead to registries showing trends, monitoring the quality of spine care given, and ultimately improving the value of the care given to patients with degenerative spinal disorders.
| S-EPMC4564774 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAn institutional registry covering all surgical specialties could be an implementation tool in quality benchmarking between hospitals and aid determination of their cost-effectiveness. The objective of this systematic literature review was to evaluate original articles on existing prospective surgical registries that can be used by single institutions across surgical specialties.MethodA systematic review of the literature using PRISMA guidelines was conducted for articles focusing on hospital-wide surgical registries. Single-specialty retrospective registries, non-defined outcome measures or system protocols, and studies not in English were excluded.ResultsFive articles were included for analysis. Evaluation of the articles revealed wide methodological heterogeneity in the classification and categorization of complications and data collection methods.ConclusionIdeal surgical quality monitoring systems should be real-time, contain patient-related risk factors, and encompass all surgical specialties. At present, such institutional registries are rarely reported and no consensus exists on their standard definitions and methodology.
| S-EPMC6156167 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designMeta-analysis.ObjectiveDespite the increasing importance of tracking clinical outcomes using valid patient-reported outcome measures, most providers do not routinely obtain baseline preoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data in patients undergoing spine surgery, precluding objective outcomes analysis in individual practices. We conducted a meta-analysis of pre- and postoperative HRQoL data obtained from the most commonly published instruments to use as reference values.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, and an institutional registry for studies reporting EQ-5D, SF-6D, and Short Form-36 Physical Component Summary scores in patients undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical and lumbar spinal conditions published between 2000 and 2014. Observational data was pooled meta-analytically using an inverse variance-weighted, random-effects model, and statistical comparisons were performed.ResultsNinety-nine articles were included in the final analysis. Baseline HRQoL scores varied by diagnosis for each of the 3 instruments. On average, postoperative HRQoL scores significantly improved following surgical intervention for each diagnosis using each instrument. There were statistically significant differences in baseline utility values between the EQ-5D and SF-6D instruments for all lumbar diagnoses.ConclusionsThe pooled HRQoL values presented in this study may be used by practitioners who would otherwise be precluded from quantifying their surgical outcomes due to a lack of baseline data. The results highlight differences in HRQoL between different degenerative spinal diagnoses, as well as the discrepancy between 2 common utility-based instruments. These findings emphasize the need to be cognizant of the specific instruments used when comparing the results of outcome studies.
| S-EPMC6362549 | biostudies-literature