Alexandriah N Alas1, Catherine Bresee2, Karyn Eilber3, Karen Toubi3, Rezoana Rashid3, Carol Roth4, Paul Shekelle5, Neil Wenger6, Jennifer T Anger7. 1. Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA. 3. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA. 4. Southern California Evidence-Based Practice Center, RAND Corporation, Los Angeles, CA. 5. Southern California Evidence-Based Practice Center, RAND Corporation, Los Angeles, CA; Department of Internal Medicine, Veterans Affairs Greater West Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA. 6. Southern California Evidence-Based Practice Center, RAND Corporation, Los Angeles, CA; Department of Internal Medicine David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. 7. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA. Electronic address: angerj@cshs.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Health care providers are increasingly being evaluated by the quality of care they provide. Our aim was to assess the feasibility of recently developed quality indicators (QIs) for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and identify possible deficits in care. STUDY DESIGN: A panel ranked 14 QIs based on the RAND appropriateness method assessing screening and diagnosis, pessary management, and surgery for POP. Retrospective chart abstraction was performed after identifying patients with a diagnosis of POP evaluated within a hospital-based multispecialty group using International Classification of Diseases, ninth edition, diagnosis codes. RESULTS: Of 283 patients identified, 98% of those with a new complaint of vaginal bulge had a pelvic examination. The POP was described but not staged in 6% and not documented at all in 25.1%. Among those managed with pessaries, 98% had vaginal examinations at least every 6 months. Forty-nine percent of the patients who had surgery had complete preoperative POP staging. Only 20% of women undergoing apical surgery had documentation of counseling regarding different surgical options, and of the women who underwent a hysterectomy for POP, only 48% had a concomitant vault suspension. Although 71% had documentation about the risk of postoperative stress incontinence, only 14.5% had documented counseling regarding risks of mesh. Only 37% of patients implanted with mesh for POP had documented follow-up at 1 year. An intraoperative cystoscopy was performed in 86% undergoing cystocele repair or apical surgery. CONCLUSION: The quality of care for women with POP can be feasibly measured with QIs. Processes of care were deficient in many areas, and our findings can serve as a basis for quality improvement interventions.
OBJECTIVE: Health care providers are increasingly being evaluated by the quality of care they provide. Our aim was to assess the feasibility of recently developed quality indicators (QIs) for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and identify possible deficits in care. STUDY DESIGN: A panel ranked 14 QIs based on the RAND appropriateness method assessing screening and diagnosis, pessary management, and surgery for POP. Retrospective chart abstraction was performed after identifying patients with a diagnosis of POP evaluated within a hospital-based multispecialty group using International Classification of Diseases, ninth edition, diagnosis codes. RESULTS: Of 283 patients identified, 98% of those with a new complaint of vaginal bulge had a pelvic examination. The POP was described but not staged in 6% and not documented at all in 25.1%. Among those managed with pessaries, 98% had vaginal examinations at least every 6 months. Forty-nine percent of the patients who had surgery had complete preoperative POP staging. Only 20% of women undergoing apical surgery had documentation of counseling regarding different surgical options, and of the women who underwent a hysterectomy for POP, only 48% had a concomitant vault suspension. Although 71% had documentation about the risk of postoperative stress incontinence, only 14.5% had documented counseling regarding risks of mesh. Only 37% of patients implanted with mesh for POP had documented follow-up at 1 year. An intraoperative cystoscopy was performed in 86% undergoing cystocele repair or apical surgery. CONCLUSION: The quality of care for women with POP can be feasibly measured with QIs. Processes of care were deficient in many areas, and our findings can serve as a basis for quality improvement interventions.
Authors: Ingrid Nygaard; Toby C Chai; Geoffrey W Cundiff; John O L Delancey; Mary Pat Fitzgerald; Michael Heit; Pamela Moalli; Holly E Richter; Leslee Subak; Steven Swift Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: John T Wei; Ingrid Nygaard; Holly E Richter; Charles W Nager; Matthew D Barber; Kim Kenton; Cindy L Amundsen; Joseph Schaffer; Susan F Meikle; Cathie Spino Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-06-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kristin Rooney; Kimberly Kenton; Elizabeth R Mueller; Mary Pat FitzGerald; Linda Brubaker Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Marianna Alperin; Aqsa Khan; Emily Dubina; Christopher Tarnay; Ning Wu; Chris L Pashos; Jennifer T Anger Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: P J Pronovost; M W Jenckes; T Dorman; E Garrett; M J Breslow; B A Rosenfeld; P A Lipsett; E Bass Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-04-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Linda Brubaker; Ingrid Nygaard; Holly E Richter; Anthony Visco; Anne M Weber; Geoffrey W Cundiff; Paul Fine; Chiara Ghetti; Morton B Brown Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Jennifer T Anger; Victoria C S Scott; Krista Kiyosaki; Aqsa A Khan; Claudia Sevilla; Sarah E Connor; Carol P Roth; Mark S Litwin; Neil S Wenger; Paul G Shekelle Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2013-05-04 Impact factor: 2.894