Dataset Information

Hospital quality reporting and improvement in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although public reporting of hospital performance is becoming common, it remains uncertain whether public reporting leads to improvement in clinical outcomes. This study was conducted to evaluate whether enrollment in a quality reporting project is associated with improvement in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Methods

We conducted a quasi-experimental study using hospital census survey and national inpatient database in Japan. Hospitals enrolled in a ministry-led quality reporting project were matched with non-reporting control hospitals by one-to-one propensity score matching using hospital characteristics. Using the inpatient data of acute myocardial infarction patients hospitalized in the matched hospitals during 2011-2013, difference-in-differences analyses were conducted to evaluate the changes in unadjusted and risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality rates over time that are attributable to intervention.

Results

Matching between hospitals created a cohort of 30,220 patients with characteristics similar between the 135 reporting and 135 non-reporting hospitals. Overall in-hospital mortality rates were 13.2% in both the reporting and non-reporting hospitals. There was no significant association between hospital enrollment in the quality reporting project and change over time in unadjusted mortality (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.80-1.22). In 28,168 patients eligible for evaluation of risk-adjusted mortality, enrollment was also not associated with change in risk-adjusted mortality (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81-1.17).

Conclusions

Enrollment in the quality reporting project was not associated with short-term improvement in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Additional efforts may be necessary to improve quality of care.

SUBMITTER: Yamana H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6033287 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hospital quality reporting and improvement in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Yamana Hayato H Kodan Mariko M Ono Sachiko S Morita Kojiro K Matsui Hiroki H Fushimi Kiyohide K Imamura Tomoaki T Yasunaga Hideo H

BMC health services research 20180704 1

<h4>Background</h4>Although public reporting of hospital performance is becoming common, it remains uncertain whether public reporting leads to improvement in clinical outcomes. This study was conducted to evaluate whether enrollment in a quality reporting project is associated with improvement in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a quasi-experimental study using hospital census survey and national inpatient database in Japan. Hospitals en ...[more]

PMID: 29973281

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionMyocardial Infarction (MI) is a leading cause of death worldwide. In high income countries, quality improvement strategies have played an important role in increasing uptake of evidence-based MI care and improving MI outcomes. The incidence of MI in sub-Saharan Africa is rising, but uptake of evidence-based care in northern Tanzania is low. There are currently no published quality improvement interventions from the region. The objective of this study was to determine provider attitudes towards a planned quality improvement intervention for MI care in northern Tanzania.MethodsThis study was conducted at a zonal referral hospital in northern Tanzania. A 41-question survey, informed by the Theoretical Framework for Acceptability, was developed by an interdisciplinary team from Tanzania and the United States. The survey, which explored provider attitudes towards MI care improvement, was administered to key provider stakeholders (physicians, nurses, and hospital administrators) using convenience sampling.ResultsA total of 140 providers were enrolled, including 82 (58.6%) nurses, 56 (40.0%) physicians, and 2 (1.4%) hospital administrators. Most participants worked in the Emergency Department or inpatient medical ward. Providers were interested in participating in a quality improvement project to improve MI care at their facility, with 139 (99.3%) strongly agreeing or agreeing with this statement. All participants agreed or strongly agreed that improvements were needed to MI care pathways at their facility. Though their facility has an MI care protocol, only 88 (62.9%) providers were aware of it. When asked which intervention would be the single-most effective strategy to improve MI care, the two most common responses were provider training (n = 66, 47.1%) and patient education (n = 41, 29.3%).ConclusionProviders in northern Tanzania reported strongly positive attitudes towards quality improvement interventions for MI care. Locally-tailored interventions to improve MI should include provider training and patient education strategies.

Project description:BackgroundIn-hospital case-fatality rates in patients, admitted for acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CFRs), are internationally used as a quality indicator. Attempting to encourage the hospitals to assume responsibility, the Belgian Ministry of Health decided to stimulate initiatives of quality improvement by means of a limited set of indicators, among which AMI-CFR, to be routinely analyzed. In this study we aimed, by determining the existence of inter-hospital differences in AMI-CFR, (1) to evaluate to which extent Belgian discharge records allow the assessment of quality of care in the field of AMI, and (2) to identify starting points for quality improvement.MethodsHospital discharge records from all the Belgian short-term general hospitals in the period 2002-2005. The study population (N = 46,287) included patients aged 18 years and older, hospitalized for AMI. No unique patient identifier being present, we tried to track transferred patients. We assessed data quality through a comparison of MCD with data from two registers for acute coronary events and through transfer and sensitivity analyses. We compared AMI-CFRs across hospitals, using multivariable logistic regression models. In the main model hospitals, Charlson's co-morbidity index, age, gender and shock constituted the covariates. We carried out two types of analyses: a first one wherein transferred-out cases were excluded, to avoid double counting of patients when computing rates, and a second one with exclusion of all transferred cases, to allow the study of patients admitted into, treated in and discharged from the same hospital.ResultsWe identified problems regarding both the CFR's numerator and denominator.Sensitivity analyses revealed differential coding and/or case management practices. In the model with exclusion of transfer-out cases, the main determinants of AMI-CFR were cardiogenic shock (OR(adj) 23.0; 95% CI [20.9;25.2]), and five-year age groups OR(adj) 1.23; 95% CI [1.11;1.36]). Sizable inter-hospital and inter-type of hospital differences {(OR(comunity vs tertiary hospitals)1.36; 95% CI [1.34;1.39]) and (OR(intermediary vs tertiary hospitals)1.36; 95% CI [1.34;1.39])}, and nonconformities to guidelines for treatment were observed.ConclusionsDespite established data quality shortcomings, the magnitude of the observed differences and the nonconformities constitute leads to quality improvement. However, to measure progress, ways to improve and routinely monitor data quality should be developed.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies have shown wide variations in prehospital ambulance care for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and stroke. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing a Quality Improvement Collaborative (QIC) for improving ambulance care for AMI and stroke.MethodsWe used an interrupted time series design to investigate the effect of a national QIC on change in delivery of care bundles for AMI (aspirin, glyceryl trinitrate [GTN], pain assessment and analgesia) and stroke (face-arm-speech test, blood pressure and blood glucose recording) in all English ambulance services between January 2010 and February 2012. Key strategies for change included local quality improvement (QI) teams in each ambulance service supported by a national coordinating expert group that conducted workshops educating staff in QI methods to improve AMI and stroke care. Expertise and ideas were shared between QI teams who met together at three national workshops, between QI leads through monthly teleconferences, and between the expert group and participants. Feedback was provided to services using annotated control charts.ResultsWe analyzed change over time using logistic regression with three predictor variables: time, gender, and age. There were statistically significant improvements in care bundles in nine (of 12) participating trusts for AMI (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.04, 1.04), nine for stroke (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.05, 1.07), 11 for either AMI or stroke, and seven for both conditions. Overall care bundle performance for AMI increased in England from 43 to 79% and for stroke from 83 to 96%. Successful services all introduced provider prompts and individualized or team feedback. Other determinants of success included engagement with front-line clinicians, feedback using annotated control charts, expert support, and shared learning between participants and organizations.ConclusionsThis first national prehospital QIC led to significant improvements in ambulance care for AMI and stroke in England. The use of care bundles as measures, clinical engagement, application of quality improvement methods, provider prompts, individualized feedback and opportunities for learning and interaction within and across organizations helped the collaborative to achieve its aims.

Project description:The objectives of this study were to determine concordance of emergency department (ED) management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with guideline recommendations and to identify ED and patient characteristics predictive of higher guideline concordance.The authors conducted a chart review study of ED AMI care as part of the National Emergency Department Safety Study (NEDSS). Using a primary hospital discharge diagnosis of AMI (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM], codes 410.XX), a random sample of ED visits for AMI in 58 urban EDs across 20 U.S. states between 2003 and 2006 were identified. Concordance with American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline recommendations was evaluated using five individual quality measures and a composite concordance score. Concordance scores were calculated as the percentage of eligible patients who received guidelines-recommended care. These percentage scores were rescaled from 0 to 100, with 100 indicating perfect concordance.The cohort consisted of 3,819 subjects; their median age was 65 years, and 62% were men. The mean (± standard deviation [SD]) ED composite concordance score was 61?±?8), with a broad range of values (42 to 84). Except for aspirin use (mean concordance, 82), ED concordance scores were low (beta-blocker use, 56; timely electrocardiogram [ECG], 41; timely fibrinolytic therapy, 26; timely ED disposition for primary percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI] candidates, 43). In multivariable analyses, older age (beta-coefficient per 10-year increase, -1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]?=?-2.4 to -0.5) and southern EDs (beta-coefficient, -5.2; 95% CI?=?-9.6 to -0.9) were associated with lower guideline concordance, whereas ST-segment elevation on initial ED ECG was associated with higher guideline concordance (beta-coefficient, 3.6; 95% CI?= 1.5 to 5.7).Overall ED concordance with guideline-recommended processes of care was low to moderate. Emergency physicians should continue to work with other stakeholders in AMI care, such as emergency medical services (EMS) and cardiologists, to develop strategies to improve care processes.

Project description:BackgroundWith the growing burden of non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), developing countries face great challenges in providing equitable treatment nationwide. However, little is known about hospital-level disparities in the quality of NSTEMI care in China. We aimed to investigate the variations in NSTEMI care and patient outcomes across the three hospital levels (province-, prefecture- and county-level, with decreasing scale) in China.MethodsData were derived from the China Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry on patients with NSTEMI consecutively registered between January 2013 and November 2016 from 31 provinces and municipalities throughout mainland China. Patients were categorized according to the hospital level they were admitted to. Multilevel generalized mixed models were fitted to examine the relationship between the hospital level and in-hospital mortality risk.ResultsIn total, 8,054 patients with NSTEMI were included (province-level: 1,698 patients; prefecture-level: 5,240 patients; county-level: 1,116 patients). Patients in the prefecture- and county-level hospitals were older, more likely to be female, and presented worse cardiac function than those in the province-level hospitals (P <0.05). Compared with the province-level hospitals, the rate of invasive strategies was significantly lower in the prefecture- and county-level hospitals (65.3, 43.3, and 15.4%, respectively, P <0.001). Invasive strategies were performed within the guideline-recommended timeframe in 25.4, 9.7, and 1.7% of very-high-risk patients, and 16.4, 7.4, and 2.4% of high-risk patients in province-, prefecture- and county-level hospitals, respectively (both P <0.001). The use of dual antiplatelet therapy in the county-level hospitals (87.2%) remained inadequate compared to the province- (94.5%, P <0.001) and prefecture-level hospitals (94.5%, P <0.001). There was an incremental trend of in-hospital mortality from province- to prefecture- to county-level hospitals (3.0, 4.4, and 6.9%, respectively, P-trend <0.001). After stepwise adjustment for patient characteristics, presentation, hospital facilities and in-hospital treatments, the hospital-level gap in mortality risk gradually narrowed and lost statistical significance in the fully adjusted model [Odds ratio: province-level vs. prefecture-level: 1.23 (0.73-2.05), P = 0.441; province-level vs. county-level: 1.61 (0.80-3.26), P = 0.182; P-trend = 0.246].ConclusionsThere were significant variations in NSTEMI presentation and treatment patterns across the three hospital levels in China, which may largely explain the hospital-level disparity in in-hospital mortality. Quality improvement initiatives are warranted, especially among lower-level hospitals.

Dataset Information

Hospital quality reporting and improvement in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Hospital quality reporting and improvement in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets