Accreditation in health care: does it make any difference to patient outcomes?

Relationship between systolic blood pressure and mortality in older vs younger trauma patients - a retrospective multicentre observational study

BACKGROUND

The population of older trauma patients is increasing. Those patients have heterogeneous presentations and need senior-friendly triaging tools. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) is commonly used to assess injury severity, and some authors advocated adjusting SBP threshold for older patients. We aimed to describe and compare the relationship between mortality and SBP in older trauma patients and their younger counterparts.

METHODS

We included patients admitted to three level-I trauma centres and performed logistic regressions with age and SBP to obtain mortality curves. Multivariable Logistic regressions were performed to measure the association between age and mortality at different SBP ranges. Subgroup analyses were conducted for major trauma and severe traumatic brain injury admissions.

RESULTS

A total of 47,661 patients were included, among which 12.9% were aged 65-74 years and 27.3% were ≥ 75 years. Overall mortality rates were 3.9%, 8.1%, and 11.7% in the groups aged 16-64, 65-74, and ≥ 75 years, respectively. The relationship between prehospital SBP and mortality was nonlinear (U-shape), mortality increased with each 10 mmHg SBP decrement from 130 to 50 mmHg and each 10-mmHg increment from 150 to 220 mmHg across all age groups. Older patients were at higher odd for mortality in all ranges of SBP. The highest OR in patients aged 65-74 years was 3.67 [95% CI: 2.08-6.45] in the 90-99 mmHg SBP range and 7.92 [95% CI: 5.13-12.23] for those aged ≥ 75 years in the 100-109 mmHg SBP range.

CONCLUSION

The relationship between SBP and mortality is nonlinear, regardless of trauma severity and age. Older age was associated with a higher odd of mortality at all SBP points. Future triage tools should therefore consider SBP as a continuous rather than a dichotomized predictor.

Proposals for the incorporation of the nursing role in the certification of axial spondyloarthritis units. Literature review and expert consensus

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the role of nursing in the approach to axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and to make proposals to include the role of rheumatology nursing consultations (RECs) in the quality certification of these specialized units.

METHODS

A systematic review of the nursing role in quality certification systems in the management of axSpA was conducted. Subsequently a consensus conference was held with the participation of three rheumatology nurses to determine elements that should be considered in future revisions of certification standards.

RESULTS

The systematic review yielded five papers as relevant. None of the publications reviewed explicitly proposed standards applicable to nursing care in the management of patients with axSpA, although they contemplated the activities of this professional group. The proposals agreed upon to incorporate the role of RECs in the certification standards for axSpA monographic units included the following: basic equipment and resources, organization, administration of pharmacological treatments and promotion of adherence, standardized programmes for axSpA, telematic consultation for monitoring the stable patient, registry of patient-reported outcome measures and e-consultation.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature on quality standards and certification standards for axSpA monographic units is scarce and hardly reflects the role of RECs in providing quality care. The consensus proposals in this study would incorporate RECs into quality certification standards. In the future, the increased presence of RECs in Spain should be accompanied by a review of the indicators regarding their role.

Associations between quality of health care and clinical outcomes in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: a rehabilitation cohort study

Background

The quality of provided health care may be an important source of variation in rehabilitation outcomes, increasing the interest in associations between quality indicators (QIs) and improved patient outcomes. Therefore, we examined the associations between the quality of rehabilitation processes and subsequent clinical outcomes among patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

Methods

In this multicentre prospective cohort study, adults with RMDs undergoing multidisciplinary rehabilitation at eight participating centres reported the quality of rehabilitation after 2 months and outcomes after 2, 7, and 12 months. We measured perceived quality of rehabilitation by 11 process indicators that cover the domains of initial assessments, patient participation and individual goal-setting, and individual follow-up and coordination across levels of health care. The patients responded “yes” or “no” to each indicator. Scores were calculated as pass rates (PRs) from 0 to 100% (best score). Clinical outcomes were goal attainment (Patient-Specific Functional Scale), physical function (30 s sit-to-stand test), and health-related quality of life (EuroQoL 5D-5L). Associations between patient-reported quality of care and each outcome measure at 7 months was analysed by linear mixed models.

Results

A total of 293 patients were enrolled in this study (mean age 52 years, 76% female). Primary diagnoses were inflammatory rheumatic disease (64%), fibromyalgia syndrome (18%), unspecific neck, shoulder, or low back pain (8%), connective tissue disease (6%), and osteoarthritis (4%). The overall median PR for the process indicators was 73% (range 11–100%). The PR was lowest (median 40%) for individual follow-up and coordination across levels of care. The mixed model analyses showed that higher PRs for the process indicators were not associated with improved goal attainment or improved physical function or improved health-related quality of life.

Conclusions

The quality of rehabilitation processes was not associated with important clinical outcomes. An implication of this is that measuring only the outcome dimension of quality may result in incomplete evaluation and monitoring of the quality of care, and we suggest using information from both the structure, process, and outcome dimensions to draw inferences about the quality, and plan future quality initiatives in the field of complex rehabilitation.

Trial registration

The study is part of the larger BRIDGE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03102814).