Performance achievement award program for Get With The Guidelines--Coronary Artery Disease is associated with global and sustained improvement in cardiac care for patients hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction

Composite measures of quality of health care: Evidence mapping of methodology and reporting

Background

Quality indicators are used to quantify the quality of care. A large number of quality indicators makes assessment of overall quality difficult, time consuming and impractical. There is consequently an increasing interest for composite measures based on a combination of multiple indicators.

Objective

To examine the use of different approaches to construct composite measures of quality of care and to assess the use of methodological considerations and justifications.

Methods

We conducted a literature search on PubMed and EMBASE databases (latest update 1 December 2020). For each publication, we extracted information on the weighting and aggregation methodology that had been used to construct composite indicator(s).

Results

A total of 2711 publications were identified of which 145 were included after a screening process. Opportunity scoring with equal weights was the most used approach (86/145, 59%) followed by all-or-none scoring (48/145, 33%). Other approaches regarding aggregation or weighting of individual indicators were used in 32 publications (22%). The rationale for selecting a specific type of composite measure was reported in 36 publications (25%), whereas 22 papers (15%) addressed limitations regarding the composite measure.

Conclusion

Opportunity scoring and all-or-none scoring are the most frequently used approaches when constructing composite measures of quality of care. The attention towards the rationale and limitations of the composite measures appears low.

Discussion

Considering the widespread use and the potential implications for decision-making of composite measures, a high level of transparency regarding the construction process of the composite and the functionality of the measures is crucial.

Association Between Hospital Recognition for Resuscitation Guideline Adherence and Rates of Survival for In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Background Hospitals participating in the national Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry receive an award for high rates of adherence to quality metrics for in-hospital cardiac arrest. We sought to evaluate whether awards based on these quality metrics can be considered a proxy for performance on cardiac arrest survival. Methods and Results Among 195 hospitals with continuous participation in Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation between 2012 and 2015, we identified 78 that received an award (Gold or Silver) for ≥85% compliance for all 4 metrics for in-hospital cardiac arrest-time to chest compressions, ≤1 minute; time to defibrillation, ≤2 minutes; device confirmation of endotracheal tube placement; and a monitored/witnessed arrest-for at least 12 consecutive months during 2014 to 2015. Award hospitals had higher cardiac arrest volumes than nonaward hospitals but otherwise had similar site characteristics. During 2014 to 2015, award hospitals had higher rates of return of spontaneous circulation for in-hospital cardiac arrest than nonaward hospitals (median [interquartile range], 71% [64%-77%] versus 66% [59%-74%]; Spearman ρ, 0.19; P=0.009). However, rates of risk-standardized survival to discharge at award hospitals (median, 25% [interquartile range, 22%-30%]) were similar to nonaward hospitals (median, 24% [interquartile range, 12%-27%]; Spearman ρ, 0.13; P=0.06). Among hospitals in the best tertile for survival to discharge in 2014 to 2015, 55.4% (36/65) did not receive an award, with poor discrimination of high-performing hospitals by award status (C statistic, 0.53). Similarly, there was only a weak association between hospitals' award status in 2014 to 2015 and their rates of survival to discharge in the preceding 2-year period (Spearman ρ, 0.16; P=0.03). Conclusions The current recognition mechanism within a national registry for in-hospital cardiac arrest captures hospital performance on return of spontaneous circulation but is not well correlated with survival to discharge. This suggests that current awards for resuscitation quality may not adequately capture hospital performance on overall survival-the outcome of greatest interest to patients.

Implementation of a Best Practice in Cardiology (BPC) Program Adapted from Get With The Guidelines®in Brazilian Public Hospitals: Study Design and Rationale

Fundamento

Existem grandes oportunidades de melhoria da qualidade do cuidado cardiovascular em países em desenvolvimento por meio da implementação de um programa de qualidade.

Objetivo

Avaliar o efeito de um programa de Boas Práticas em Cardiologia (BPC) nos indicadores de desempenho e desfechos clínicos dos pacientes relacionados à insuficiência cardíaca, fibrilação atrial e síndromes coronarianas agudas em um subconjunto de hospitais públicos brasileiros.

Métodos

O programa Boas Práticas em Cardiologia (BPC) foi adaptado do programa Get With The Guidelines (GWTG) da American Heart Association (AHA) para ser utilizado no Brasil. O programa está sendo iniciado em três domínios de cuidado simultaneamente (síndrome coronariana aguda, fibrilação atrial e insuficiência cardíaca), o que consiste em uma abordagem nunca testada no GWTG. Existem seis eixos de intervenções utilizadas pela literatura sobre tradução do conhecimento que abordará barreiras locais identificadas por meio de entrevistas estruturadas e reuniões regulares para auditoria e feedback. Planeja-se incluir no mínimo 10 hospitais e 1500 pacientes por doença cardíaca. O desfecho primário inclui as taxas de adesão às medidas de cuidado recomendadas pelas diretrizes. Desfechos secundários incluem o efeito do programa sobre o tempo de internação, mortalidade global e específica, taxas de readmissão, qualidade de vida, percepção do paciente sobre saúde e adesão dos pacientes às intervenções prescritas.

Resultados

Espera-se, nos hospitais participantes, uma melhoria e a manutenção das taxas de adesão as recomendações baseadas em evidência e dos desfechos dos pacientes. Este é o primeiro programa em melhoria da qualidade a ser realizado na América do Sul, que fornecerá informações importantes de como programas de sucesso originados em países desenvolvidos como os Estados Unidos podem ser adaptados às necessidades de países com economias em desenvolvimento como o Brasil. Um programa bem sucedido dará informações valiosas para o desenvolvimento de programas de melhoria da qualidade em outros países em desenvolvimento.

Conclusões

Este estudo de mundo real proverá informações para a avaliação e aumento da adesão às diretrizes de cardiologia no Brasil, bem como a melhora dos processos assistenciais. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2020; 115(1):92-99)

Comparison of lipid management in patients with coronary versus peripheral arterial disease

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD), similar to coronary artery disease (CAD), is a significant predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Guidelines recommend a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) goal of <100 mg/dl for both groups. We assessed whether lipid control and statin use were as aggressively applied to PAD as to patients with CAD. This retrospective study of patients with the diagnosis of CAD, PAD, or both CAD and PAD compared lipid levels and statin use. For comparison of statins, we used a statin potency unit (1 potency unit=10 mg of simvastatin). Among 11,134 subjects (CAD 9,563, PAD 596, and both CAD and PAD 975), mean LDL in the PAD group was higher than the CAD (92 vs 83 mg/dl, respectively, p<0.001) and the combined CAD and PAD groups (92 vs 80 mg/dl, respectively, p<0.001). Fewer patients with PAD achieved a target LDL of <100 mg/dl compared with CAD (62% vs 78%, respectively, p<0.001) and the combined group (62% vs 79%, respectively, p<0.001). Similar differences were noted for a target LDL of <70 mg/dl. Compared with the CAD group, a lesser number of patients with PAD received statin therapy (76% vs 100%, respectively, p<0.001) with lower mean potency unit (5.3 vs 8.1, respectively, p<0.001). In conclusion, our study demonstrated lower use and less aggressive application of statins in patients with PAD compared with patients with CAD, ensuing lower mean LDL in the CAD and combined PAD and CAD groups. Our study suggests that physicians are more aggressive with lipid control in patients with CAD compared with patients with PAD alone.

Acute coronary syndromes: considerations for improved acceptance and implementation of management guidelines

The management of acute coronary syndrome in Europe is covered by various European Society of Cardiology guidelines, which although valuable, are complex and may not always provide clear guidance in everyday clinical practice. Consequently, implementation of the guideline recommendations is frequently suboptimal. To complicate matters further, a wealth of new data from large trials examining novel anti-thrombotic agents will become or are already available, necessitating guideline updates. This article summarizes the gaps between current guideline-recommended treatment of acute coronary syndrome and daily practice as dictated by the evidence base, including recent trials. Reasons for the suboptimal implementation of the current European Society of Cardiology guidelines and possible solutions to making these more practice oriented are presented.