Dennis van Veghel1, Edgar J Daeter2, Matthijs Bax3, Giovanni Amoroso4, Yuri Blaauw5, Cyril Camaro6, Paul Cummins7, Frank R Halfwerk8, Inez J Wijdh-den Hamer9, Jonas S S G de Jong4, Wim Stooker10, Philip J van der Wees11, Paul B van der Nat1. 1. Netherlands Heart Registry, Moreelsepark 1, 3511 EP Utrecht, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan 1, 3435 CM Nieuwegein, The Netherlands. 3. Department of cardiology, Haga Teaching Hospital, Els Borst-Eilersplein 275, 2545 AA Den Haag, The Netherlands. 4. Department of cardiology, OLVG, Oosterpark 9, 1091 AC Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands. 6. Radboud University Medical Center, Department of Cardiology, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Cardiology, Erasmus MC, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 8. Thorax Center Twente, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Koningstraat 1, 7512 KZ Enschede, The Netherlands. 9. University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands. 10. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, OlvG, Oosterpark 9, 1091 AC Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 11. Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
AIMS: Fourteen Dutch heart centres collected patient-relevant outcomes to support quality improvements in a value-based healthcare initiative that began in 2012. This study aimed to evaluate the current state of outcome-based quality improvement within six of these Dutch heart centres. METHODS AND RESULTS: Interviews and questionnaires among physicians and healthcare professionals in the heart centres were combined in a mixed-methods approach. The analysis indicates that the predominant focus of the heart centres is on the actual monitoring of outcomes. A systematic approach for the identification of improvement potential and the selection and implementation of improvement initiatives is lacking. The organizational context for outcome-based quality improvement is similar in the six heart centres. CONCLUSION: Although these heart centres in the Netherlands measure health outcomes for the majority of cardiac diseases, the actual use of these outcomes to improve quality of care remains limited. The main barriers are limitations regarding (i) data infrastructure, (ii) a systematic approach for the identification of improvement potential and the selection and implementation of improvement initiatives, (iii) governance in which roles and responsibilities of physicians regarding outcome improvement are formalized, and (iv) implementation of outcomes within hospital strategy, policy documents, and the planning and control cycle.
AIMS: Fourteen Dutch heart centres collected patient-relevant outcomes to support quality improvements in a value-based healthcare initiative that began in 2012. This study aimed to evaluate the current state of outcome-based quality improvement within six of these Dutch heart centres. METHODS AND RESULTS: Interviews and questionnaires among physicians and healthcare professionals in the heart centres were combined in a mixed-methods approach. The analysis indicates that the predominant focus of the heart centres is on the actual monitoring of outcomes. A systematic approach for the identification of improvement potential and the selection and implementation of improvement initiatives is lacking. The organizational context for outcome-based quality improvement is similar in the six heart centres. CONCLUSION: Although these heart centres in the Netherlands measure health outcomes for the majority of cardiac diseases, the actual use of these outcomes to improve quality of care remains limited. The main barriers are limitations regarding (i) data infrastructure, (ii) a systematic approach for the identification of improvement potential and the selection and implementation of improvement initiatives, (iii) governance in which roles and responsibilities of physicians regarding outcome improvement are formalized, and (iv) implementation of outcomes within hospital strategy, policy documents, and the planning and control cycle.
Authors: Kirsten Daniels; Marc B V Rouppe van der Voort; Douwe H Biesma; Paul B van der Nat Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-10-20 Impact factor: 2.908
Authors: G J van Steenbergen; D van Veghel; D N Schulz; M Soliman-Hamad; P A Tonino; S Houterman; L Dekker Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2020-12-07 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: Dane Lansdaal; Femke van Nassau; Marije van der Steen; Martine de Bruijne; Marian Smeulers Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-01-04 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Dorine J van Staalduinen; Petra van den Bekerom; Sandra Groeneveld; Martha Kidanemariam; Anne M Stiggelbout; M Elske van den Akker-van Marle Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 2.655