S de Lusignan1. 1. Primary Care Informatics, Division of Community Health Sciences, St. George's, University of London, London, UK. slusigna@sgul.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To report the lessons learned from eight years of feeding back routinely collected cardiovascular data in an educational context METHODS: There are distinct educational and technical components. The educational component provides peer-led learning opportunities based on comparative analysis of quality of care, as represented in computer records. The technical part ensures that relevant evidence-based audit criteria are identified; an appropriate dataset is extracted and processed to facilitate quality improvement. Anonymised data are used to provide inter-practice comparisons, with lists of identifiable patients who need interventions left in individual practices. RESULTS: The progressive improvement in cholesterol management in ischaemic heart disease (IHD) is used as an exemplar of the changes achieved. Over three iterations of the cardiovascular programme the standardised prevalence of IHD recorded in GP computer systems rose from 3.8% to 4.0%. Cholesterol recording rose from 47.6% to 89.0%; and the mean cholesterol level fell from 5.18 to 4.67 mmol/L; while statin prescribing rose from 46% to 57% to 68%. The atrial fibrillation, heart failure and renal programmes (more people with chronic kidney disease go on to die from cardiovascular cause than from end-stage renal disease) are used to demonstrate the range of cardiovascular interventions amenable to this approach. CONCLUSIONS: Technical progress has meant that larger datasets can be extracted and processed. Feedback of routinely collected data in an educational context is acceptable to practitioners and results in quality improvement. Further research is needed to assess its utility as a strategy and cost-effectiveness compared with other methods.
OBJECTIVES: To report the lessons learned from eight years of feeding back routinely collected cardiovascular data in an educational context METHODS: There are distinct educational and technical components. The educational component provides peer-led learning opportunities based on comparative analysis of quality of care, as represented in computer records. The technical part ensures that relevant evidence-based audit criteria are identified; an appropriate dataset is extracted and processed to facilitate quality improvement. Anonymised data are used to provide inter-practice comparisons, with lists of identifiable patients who need interventions left in individual practices. RESULTS: The progressive improvement in cholesterol management in ischaemic heart disease (IHD) is used as an exemplar of the changes achieved. Over three iterations of the cardiovascular programme the standardised prevalence of IHD recorded in GP computer systems rose from 3.8% to 4.0%. Cholesterol recording rose from 47.6% to 89.0%; and the mean cholesterol level fell from 5.18 to 4.67 mmol/L; while statin prescribing rose from 46% to 57% to 68%. The atrial fibrillation, heart failure and renal programmes (more people with chronic kidney disease go on to die from cardiovascular cause than from end-stage renal disease) are used to demonstrate the range of cardiovascular interventions amenable to this approach. CONCLUSIONS: Technical progress has meant that larger datasets can be extracted and processed. Feedback of routinely collected data in an educational context is acceptable to practitioners and results in quality improvement. Further research is needed to assess its utility as a strategy and cost-effectiveness compared with other methods.
Authors: Sabine Ludt; Stephen M Campbell; Jan van Lieshout; Richard Grol; Joachim Szecsenyi; Michel Wensing Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2011-04-07 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Mohammad A Tahir; Olga Dmitrieva; Simon de Lusignan; Jeremy van Vlymen; Tom Chan; Ramez Golmohamad; Kevin Harris; Charles Tomson; Nicola Thomas; Hugh Gallagher Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2011-08-05 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Simon de Lusignan; Hugh Gallagher; Tom Chan; Nicki Thomas; Jeremy van Vlymen; Michael Nation; Neerja Jain; Aumran Tahir; Elizabeth du Bois; Iain Crinson; Nigel Hague; Fiona Reid; Kevin Harris Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2009-07-14 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Olga Dmitrieva; Simon de Lusignan; Iain C Macdougall; Hugh Gallagher; Charles Tomson; Kevin Harris; Terry Desombre; David Goldsmith Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Tom Marshall; Paul Westerby; Jenny Chen; Mary Fairfield; Jenny Harding; Ruth Westerby; Rajai Ahmad; John Middleton Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2008-02-25 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Imran Rafi; Susmita Chowdhury; Tom Chan; Ibrahim Jubber; Mohammad Tahir; Simon de Lusignan Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2013-07-24 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Simon de Lusignan; Simon de Lusignana; Hugh Gallagher; Simon Jones; Tom Chan; Jeremy van Vlymen; Aumran Tahir; Nicola Thomas; Neerja Jain; Olga Dmitrieva; Imran Rafi; Andrew McGovern; Kevin Harris Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2013-03-27 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Mohammad Tahir; Simon Hassan; Simon de Lusignan; Lazza Shaheen; Tom Chan; Olga Dmitrieva Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 2.388