Literature DB >> 21878668

Lost in translation: health resource variability in the achievement of optimal performance and clinical outcome.

Carolyn M Astley1, Colin J Macdougall, Patricia M Davidson, Derek P Chew.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND- An evidence-practice gap in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is commonly recognized. System, provider, and patient factors can influence guideline adherence. Through using guideline facilitators in the clinical setting, the uptake of evidence-based recommendations may be increased. We hypothesized that facilitators of guideline recommendations (systems, tools, and workforce) in acute cardiac care were associated with increased guideline adherence and decreased adverse outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS- A cross-sectional evaluation of guideline facilitators was conducted in Australian hospitals. The population was derived from the Acute Coronary Syndrome Prospective Audit (ACACIA) and assessed performance, death, and recurrent myocardial infarction (death/re-MI) at 30 days and 12 months. Thirty-five hospitals and 2392 patients participated. Significant associations with decreased death/re-MI were observed with hospital strategies to facilitate primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation MI patients (38/428 [8.9%] versus 30/154 [19.5%], P<0.001) and after adjustment (odds ratio [OR], 0.47 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.24 to 0.90], P<0.023), electronic discharge checklists (none: 233/1956 [11.9%], integrated; 43/251[17.1%], P=0.069, electronic; 6/124 [4.8%], P<0.001) and after adjustment (integrated versus none: OR, 1.66 [95% CI, 0.98 to 2.80], P=0.057 and electronic versus none: OR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.68], P<0.001), and intensive cardiac care unit (ICCU) staff-to-patient ratios (neither: 200/1257 (15.9%), CCU: 135/1051 (12.8%), ICCU: 8/84 (9.5%), P=0.049 and after adjustment (CCU versus neither: OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.47 to 1.14], P=0.172 and ICCU versus neither: OR, 0.55; [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.81] P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS- Facilitating uptake of evidence in clinical practice may need to consider quality improvement systems, tools and workforce to achieve optimal ACS outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21878668     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.110.960229

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes        ISSN: 1941-7713


  4 in total

Review 1.  Health resource variability in the achievement of optimal performance and clinical outcome in ischemic heart disease.

Authors:  Partha Sardar; Amartya Kundu; Ramez Nairooz; Saurav Chatterjee; Gary S Ledley; Wilbert S Aronow
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 2.931

2.  Managing the information boundary of an organization: key aspect of translating research into practice.

Authors:  Harlan M Krumholz; Nicholas S Downing
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2014-11-11

3.  Objective Risk Assessment vs Standard Care for Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Derek P Chew; Karice Hyun; Erin Morton; Matt Horsfall; Graham S Hillis; Clara K Chow; Stephen Quinn; Mario D'Souza; Andrew T Yan; Chris P Gale; Shaun G Goodman; Keith Fox; David Brieger
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 14.676

4.  Passive Prescription of Secondary Prevention Medical Therapy during Index Hospitalization for Acute Myocardial Infarction Is Prevalent and Associated with Adverse Clinical Outcomes.

Authors:  Nancy Xurui Huang; John E Sanderson; Fang Fang; Cheuk-Man Yu; Bryan P Yan
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2021-12-23       Impact factor: 2.682

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.