First results of a national initiative to enable quality improvement of cardiovascular care by transparently reporting on patient-relevant outcomes

36Citations
Citations of this article
65Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to assess patient-relevant outcomes of delivered cardiovascular care by focusing on disease management as determined by a multidisciplinary Heart Team, to establish and share best practices by comparing outcomes and to embed value-based decision-making to improve quality and efficiency in Dutch heart centres. METHODS: In 2014, 12 Dutch heart centres pooled patient-relevant outcome data, which resulted in transparent publication of the outcomes, including long-term follow-up up to 5 years, of approximately 86 000 heart patients. This study presents the results of both disease- and treatment patient-relevant outcome measures for coronary artery disease and aortic valve disease. The patients included were presented to a Heart Team and underwent invasive or operative treatment. In-hospital and out-of-hospital patient-relevant outcome measures were collected as well as initial conditions. Quality of life was assessed using the Short Form (SF)-36 or SF-12 health survey. RESULTS: In the Netherlands, patient-relevant and risk-adjusted outcomes of cardiovascular care in participating heart centres are published annually. Data were sufficiently reliable to enable comparisons and to subtract best practices. The statistically lower risk-adjusted mortality rate after coronary artery bypass grafting resulted in a voluntary roll-out of a perioperative safety check. The in-depth analysis of outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention resulted in process improvements in several heart centres, such as pre-hydration for patients with renal insufficiency and the need of target vessel revascularizations within a year. CONCLUSION: Annual data collection on follow-up of patient-relevant outcomes of cardiovascular care, initiated and organized by physicians, appears feasible. Transparent publication of outcomes drives the improvement of quality within heart centres. The system of using a limited set of patient-relevant outcome measures enables reliable comparisons and exposes the quality of decision-making and the operational process. Transparent communication on outcomes is feasible, safe and cost-effective, and stimulates professional decision-making and disease management.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

van Veghel, D., Marteijn, M., & de Mol, B. (2016). First results of a national initiative to enable quality improvement of cardiovascular care by transparently reporting on patient-relevant outcomes. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 49(6), 1660–1669. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezw034

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free