Search

Background: Clinical quality registries (CQR) aid in measuring, collecting and monitoring outcome data but it is still unknown how these data are used by hospitals to improve the quality of care. This study assessed the current state of outcome-based quality improvement in the Netherlands in 2022 based on data from multiple disease areas and CQRs; cardiothoracic surgery (Netherlands Heart Registration [NHR]), cardiology (NHR), nephrology, (Nefrovision), intensive care (National Intensive Care Evaluation [NICE]), and orthopaedic surgery (Dutch Arthroplasty Register [LROI])., Methods & Results: The Health Outcomes Management Evaluation (HOME) model was used to assess the current state of outcome-based quality improvement. A questionnaire with 36 questions was sent to healthcare departments of the six disease areas in participating hospitals within five quality registrations in the Netherlands. In total, 124 responses were received; 20 within cardiology, 12 within cardiothoracic surgery, 30 within nephrology, 35 within intensive care and 27 within orthopaedic surgery. Results showed outcome measures were actively used to improve the quality of care, several improvement initiatives were implemented, but outcomes were not always monitored regularly. Results differed between hospitals, but differences were limited between disease areas., Conclusion: The current state of outcome-based quality improvement in all five disease areas is that outcome measures were consequently employed and used on a frequent basis aiming to achieve quality improvement in healthcare. Results can be improved by structurally embedding the entire improvement cycle into the organisation., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

This study examines, from a legal standpoint, the conditions under which patient data may be shared and processed by clinical quality registries in the Netherlands and investigates the potential impact of the proposed changes of the Healthcare Quality, Complaints and Disputes Act (WKKGZ) on these practices. Healthcare providers in the Netherlands may share patient data with clinical quality registries to measure and improve care quality, provided they have explicit patient consent or a legal basis. While there is general consensus within the field, legal ambiguity remains regarding processing data without explicit consent. Proposed changes to the WKKGZ would create an explicit legal basis for clinical quality registries to collect and process patient data without explicit consent, aiming to improve to improve the quality of care for the greater public interest.

Background: Type I and type II diabetes mellitus (DM) patients have a higher prevalence of cardiovascular diseases, as well as a higher mortality risk of cardiovascular diseases and interventions. This study provides an update on the impact of DM on clinical outcomes, including mortality, complications and reinterventions, using data on percutaneous and surgical cardiac interventions in the Netherlands., Methods: This is a retrospective, nearby nationwide study using real-world observational data registered by the Netherlands Heart Registration (NHR) between 2015 and 2020. Patients treated for combined or isolated coronary artery disease (CAD) and aortic valve disease (AVD) were studied. Bivariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between DM and clinical outcomes both unadjusted and adjusted for baseline characteristics., Results: 241,360 patients underwent the following interventions; percutaneous coronary intervention(N = 177,556), coronary artery bypass grafting(N = 39,069), transcatheter aortic valve implantation(N = 11,819), aortic valve replacement(N = 8,028) and combined CABG and AVR(N = 4,888). The incidence of DM type I and II was 21.1%, 26.7%, 17.8%, 27.6% and 27% respectively. For all procedures, there are statistically significant differences between patients living with and without diabetes, adjusted for baseline characteristics, at the expense of patients with diabetes for 30-days mortality after PCI (OR = 1.68; p <.001); 120-days mortality after CABG (OR = 1.35; p <.001), AVR (OR = 1.5; p <.03) and CABG + AVR (OR = 1.42; p =.02); and 1-year mortality after CABG (OR = 1.43; p <.001), TAVI (OR = 1.21; p =.01) and PCI (OR = 1.68; p <.001)., Conclusion: Patients with DM remain to have unfavourable outcomes compared to nondiabetic patients which calls for a critical reappraisal of existing care pathways aimed at diabetic patients within the cardiovascular field., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation often necessitates catheter ablation when antiarrhythmic drug therapy fails. Single-shot technologies using thermal energy, such as cryoballoon ablation, are commonly used, but pulsed field ablation (PFA), an innovative non-thermal ablation technique, is a potential alternative. This retrospective observational study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of cryoballoon ablation and PFA in patients undergoing their first pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) procedure for atrial fibrillation treatment., Methods: We utilised real-world data from patients who underwent PVI using cryoballoon ablation or PFA. The primary outcome encompassed procedural complications, including phrenic nerve palsy, cardiac tamponade, thromboembolic complications, bleeding complications and mortality. Secondary outcomes were procedural characteristics including procedure duration, length of hospital admission, and re-do ablation rates within 6 months., Results: A total of 1714 procedures were analysed: 1241 in the cryoballoon group and 473 in the PFA group. Gender distribution (p = 0.03) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (p = 0.01) differed significantly. With regard to the primary outcome, the cryoballoon group demonstrated a higher incidence of phrenic nerve palsy compared with the PFA group (15 vs 0; p = 0.02). The procedure duration was shorter in the PFA group, even after adjusting for baseline characteristics (95.0 vs 74.0 min; p < 0.001). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, admission duration differed between the groups as well (p = 0.04)., Conclusion: The study results supported the safety and efficacy of PFA over cryoballoon ablation for PVI, highlighting advantages such as shorter procedure duration and absence of phrenic nerve palsy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objectives: This study evaluates clinical outcomes after implementing a liberal post-dilatation strategy during PCI., Background: Post-dilatation after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is performed to achieve optimal stent expansion and reduce complications. However, its prognostic effects are unclear and conflicting., Methods: This study is a pre-post-intervention analysis of two cohorts, before (2015-2017) and after (2018-2020) implementation of a liberal post-dilatation strategy. The primary end point consisted of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 30 days. Secondary end points consisted of the individual components of the primary end point as well as 1 year mortality and target vessel revascularization., Results: A total of 10,153 patients were included: 5,383 in the pre-cohort and 4,770 in the post-cohort. The 30-day MACE was 5.00% in the pre-cohort and 4.09% in the post-cohort (p = 0.008; OR 0.75 (CI 0.61-0.93)). There was a significant difference between the pre- and post-cohort in 30-day mortality, respectively, 2.91% and 2.25% (p = .01; OR 0.70 (CI 0.53-0.93)), and MI at 30 days, 1.17% versus 0.59% (p = .003; OR 0.49 (CI 0.31-0.78)). At 1 year, there was a significant difference in mortality between the pre-cohort, 5.84%, and post-cohort, 5.19% (p = .02; OR 0.79 (CI 0.66-0.96))., Conclusions: A liberal post-dilatation strategy after PCI was associated with a significant decrease in 30-day MACE, 30-day MI, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality. Future studies are warranted to validate the causality between post-dilatation and improvement of clinical outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Hellenic Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: Routine outcome monitoring is becoming standard in care evaluations, but costs are still underrepresented in these efforts. The primary aim of this study was therefore to assess if patient-relevant cost drivers can be used alongside clinical outcomes to evaluate an improvement project and to provide insight into (remaining) areas for improvement., Methods: Data from patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) between 2013 and 2018 at a single center in the Netherlands were used. A quality improvement strategy was implemented in October 2015, and pre- (A) and post-quality improvement cohorts (B) were distinguished. For each cohort, clinical outcomes, quality of life (QoL), and cost drivers were collected from the national cardiac registry and hospital registration data. The most appropriate cost drivers in TAVI care were selected from hospital registration data using a novel stepwise approach with an expert panel of physicians, managers, and patient representatives. A radar chart was used to visualize the clinical outcomes, QoL and the selected costs drivers., Results: We included 81 patients in cohort A and 136 patients in cohort B. All-cause mortality at 30 days was borderline significantly lower in cohort B than in cohort A (1.5% vs 7.4%, P = .055). QoL improved after TAVI for both cohorts. The stepwise approach resulted in 21 patient-relevant cost drivers. Costs for pre-procedural outpatient clinic visits (€535, interquartile range [IQR] = 321-675, vs €650, IQR = 512-890, P < .001), costs for the procedure (€1354, IQR = 1236-1686, vs €1474, IQR = 1372-1620, P < .001), and imaging during admission (€318, IQR = 174-441, vs €329, IQR = 267-682, P = .002) were significantly lower in cohort B than in cohort A. Possible improvement potential was seen in 30-day pacemaker implantation and 120-day readmission., Conclusion: A selection of patient-relevant cost drivers is a valuable addition to clinical outcomes for use in evaluation of improvement projects and identification of room for further improvement., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)