Evaluating the effect of a web-based quality improvement system with feedback and outreach visits on guideline concordance in the field of cardiac rehabilitation: rationale and study protocol

Implementation Science

Niels Peek³  Monique WM Jaspers⁵  Wilma JM Scholte op Reimer¹  Hareld MC Kemps⁴  Sabine N van der Veer²  Nicolette F de Keizer⁵  Mariëtte M van Engen-Verheul⁵ 

[1] Amsterdam School of Health Professions, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;European Renal Best Practice (ERBP) Methods Support Team, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium;Health e-Research Centre, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK;Department of Cardiology, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands;Department of Medical Informatics, Academic Medical Centre/University of Amsterdam, (Room J1b-113.2), Amsterdam, 1100 DD, The Netherlands

关键词: Guideline adherence;    Cardiac rehabilitation;    Health care;    Quality indicators;    Quality improvement;   

Others  :  1146102
DOI  :  10.1186/s13012-014-0131-y

 received in 2014-06-19, accepted in 2014-09-19,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Implementation of clinical practice guidelines into daily care is hampered by a variety of barriers related to professional knowledge and collaboration in teams and organizations. To improve guideline concordance by changing the clinical decision-making behavior of professionals, computerized decision support (CDS) has been shown to be one of the most effective instruments. However, to address barriers at the organizational level, additional interventions are needed. Continuous monitoring and systematic improvement of quality are increasingly used to achieve change at this level in complex health care systems. The study aims to assess the effectiveness of a web-based quality improvement (QI) system with indicator-based performance feedback and educational outreach visits to overcome organizational barriers for guideline concordance in multidisciplinary teams in the field of cardiac rehabilitation (CR).

Methods

A multicenter cluster-randomized trial with a balanced incomplete block design will be conducted in 18 Dutch CR clinics using an electronic patient record with CDS at the point of care. The intervention consists of (i) periodic performance feedback on quality indicators for CR and (ii) educational outreach visits to support local multidisciplinary QI teams focussing on systematically improving the care they provide. The intervention is supported by a web-based system which provides an overview of the feedback and facilitates development and monitoring of local QI plans. The primary outcome will be concordance to national CR guidelines with respect to the CR needs assessment and therapy indication procedure. Secondary outcomes are changes in performance of CR clinics as measured by structure, process and outcome indicators, and changes in practice variation on these indicators. We will also conduct a qualitative process evaluation (concept-mapping methodology) to assess experiences from participating CR clinics and to gain insight into factors which influence the implementation of the intervention.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this will be the first study to evaluate the effect of providing performance feedback with a web-based system that incorporates underlying QI concepts. The results may contribute to improving CR in the Netherlands, increasing knowledge on facilitators of guideline implementation in multidisciplinary health care teams and identifying success factors of multifaceted feedback interventions.

Trial registration

NTR3251 webcite.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 van Engen-Verheul et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Field MJ, Lohr KN: Guidelines for Clinical Practice: Directions for a new Program. Institute of Medicine, National Academy Press, Washington, DS; 1990.
• [2]Grimshaw JM, Russell IT: Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a systematic review of rigorous evaluations. Lancet 1993, 342:1317-1322.
• [3]Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J: Clinical guidelines: potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ 1999, 318:527-530.
• [4]Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Tetroe J: Implementing clinical guidelines: current evidence and future implications. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2004, 24(Suppl 1):S31-S37.
• [5]Goud R, Hasman A, Peek N: Development of a guideline-based decision support system with explanation facilities for outpatient therapy. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2008, 91:145-153.
• [6]Goud R, Hasman A, Strijbis AM, Peek N: A parallel guideline development and formalization strategy to improve the quality of clinical practice guidelines. Int J Med Inform 2009, 78:513-520.
• [7]Goud R, de Keizer NF, ter RG, Wyatt JC, Hasman A, Hellemans IM, Peek N: Effect of guideline based computerised decision support on decision making of multidisciplinary teams: cluster randomised trial in cardiac rehabilitation. BMJ 2009, 338:b1440.
• [8]Goud R, van Engen-Verheul M, de Keizer NF, Bal R, Hasman A, Hellemans IM, Peek N: The effect of computerized decision support on barriers to guideline implementation: a qualitative study in outpatient cardiac rehabilitation. Int J Med Inform 2010, 79:430-437.
• [9]Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, Wu AW, Wilson MH, Abboud PA, Rubin HR: Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA 1999, 282:1458-1465.
• [10]Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay CR, Vale L, Whitty P, Eccles MP, Matowe L, Shirran L, Wensing M, Dijkstra R, Donaldson C: Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess 2004, 8(iii-iv):1-72.
• [11]Bright TJ, Wong A, Dhurjati R, Bristow E, Bastian L, Coeytaux RR, Samsa G, Hasselblad V, Williams JW, Musty MD, Wing L, Kendrick AS, Sanders GD, Lobach D: Effect of clinical decision-support systems: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2012, 157:29-43.
• [12]Roshanov PS, Misra S, Gerstein HC, Garg AX, Sebaldt RJ, Mackay JA, Weise-Kelly L, Navarro T, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB: CCDSS Systematic Review Team: Computerized clinical decision support systems for chronic disease management: a decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review. Implement Sci 2011, 6(92):92-96. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-92 BioMed Central Full Text
• [13]Roshanov PS, Fernandes N, Wilczynski JM, Hemens BJ, You JJ, Handler SM, Nieuwlaat R, Souza NM, Beyene J, Van Spall HG, Garg AX, Haynes RB: Features of effective computerised clinical decision support systems: meta-regression of 162 randomised trials. BMJ 2013, 346:f657. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f657
• [14]Tucker A, Edmondson A: Why hospitals don’t learn from failures: organizational and psychological dynamics that inhibit system change. Calif Manage Rev 2003, 45:55-72.
• [15]Davies HTO, Powell AE, Rushmer RK: Healthcare Professionals’ Views on Clinician Engagement in Quality Improvement: a Literature Review. The Health Foundation, London; 2007.
• [16]Langley GL, Nolan KM, Nolan TW, Norman CL, Provost LP: The Improvement Guide: a Practical Approach to Enhancing Organizational Performance (2nd Edition). Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, California, USA; 2009.
• [17]Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, Odgaard-Jensen J, French SD, O'Brien MA, Johansen M, Grimshaw J, Oxman AD: Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012, 6(CD000259):CD000259.
• [18]Wensing M, van der Weijden T, Grol R: Implementing guidelines and innovations in general practice: which interventions are effective? Br J Gen Pract 1998, 48:991-997.
• [19]NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination: Getting Evidence into Practice. Effective Health Care. Latimer Trend & Company Ltd, Plymouth, Great Britain; 1999.
• [20]Grol R, Grimshaw J: From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet 2003, 362:1225-1230.
• [21]Francke AL, Smit MC, de Veer AJ, Mistiaen P: Factors influencing the implementation of clinical guidelines for health care professionals: a systematic meta-review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2008, 8:38. BioMed Central Full Text
• [22]van Engen-Verheul M, de Keizer N, Hellemans I, Kraaijenhagen R, Hasman A, Peek N: Design of a continuous multifaceted guideline-implementation strategy based on computerized decision support. Stud Health Technol Inform 2010, 160:836-840.
• [23]van Engen-Verheul MM, Kemps HM, de Keizer NF, Hellemans IM, Goud R, Kraaijenhagen RA, Peek N: Revision of the Dutch clinical algorithm for assessing patient needs in cardiac rehabilitation based on identified implementation problems. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2012, 19:504-514.
• [24]van Engen-Verheul M, Kemps H, Kraaijenhagen R, de Keizer N, Peek N: Modified rand method to derive quality indicators: a case study in cardiac rehabilitation. Stud Health Technol Inform 2011, 169:88-92.
• [25]Campbell BF, Sengupta S, Santos C, Lorig KR: Balanced incomplete block design: description, case study, and implications for practice. Health Educ Q 1995, 22:201-210.
• [26]Rehabilitation Committee: Netherlands Society for Cardiology (NVVC) and Netherlands Heart Foundation (NHS) (both Guidelines on Cardiac Rehabilitation 2004) and Working Group PAAHR (partial revision 2011): Multidisciplinary Guidelines for Cardiac Rehabilitation (in Dutch). Netherlands Society for Cardiology (NVVC), Utrecht; 2011.
• [27]Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Receipt of outpatient cardiac rehabilitation among heart attack survivors—United States, 2005 JAMA 2008, 299:1534-1536.
• [28]Ades PA: Cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 2001, 345:892-902.
• [29]Bethell H, Dalal H, Lewin R: Cardiac rehabilitation in the United Kingdom. Heart 2009, 95:271-5.
• [30]World Health Organization: Needs and Action Priorities in Cardiac Rehabilitation and Secondary Prevention in Patients with CHD. World Health Organization, Copenhagen; 1993.
• [31]Thomas RJ, King M, Lui K, Oldridge N, Pina IL, Spertus J, Bonow RO, Estes NA 3rd, Goff DC, Grady KL, Hiniker AR, Masoudi FA, Radford MJ, Rumsfeld JS, Whitman GR: AACVPR; ACC; AHA; American College of Chest Physicians; American College of Sports Medicine; American Physical Therapy Association; Canadian Association of Cardiac Rehabilitation; European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation; Inter-American Heart Foundation; National Association of Clinical Nurse Specialists; Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association; Society of Thoracic Surgeons: AACVPR/ACC/AHA 2007 performance measures on cardiac rehabilitation for referral to and delivery of cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention services endorsed by the American College of Chest Physicians, American College of Sports Medicine, American Physical Therapy Association, Canadian Association of Cardiac Rehabilitation, European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation, Inter-American Heart Foundation, National Association of Clinical Nurse Specialists, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007, 50:1400-1433.
• [32]Piepoli MF, Corra U, Benzer W, Bjarnason-Wehrens B, Dendale P, Gaita D, McGee H, Mendes M, Niebauer J, Zwisler AD, Schmid JP: Cardiac Rehabilitation Section of the European Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation: Secondary prevention through cardiac rehabilitation: from knowledge to implementation. A position paper from the Cardiac Rehabilitation Section of the European Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2010, 17:1-17.
• [33]Leon AS, Franklin BA, Costa F, Balady GJ, Berra KA, Stewart KJ, Thompson PD, Williams MA, Lauer MS: American Heart Association; Council on Clinical Cardiology (Subcommittee on Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention); Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism (Subcommittee on Physical Activity); American association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation: Cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease: an American Heart Association scientific statement from the Council on Clinical Cardiology (Subcommittee on Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention) and the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism (Subcommittee on Physical Activity), in collaboration with the American association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation. Circulation 2005, 111:369-376.
• [34]Corra U, Piepoli MF, Carre F, Heuschmann P, Hoffmann U, Verschuren M, Halcox J, Giannuzzi P, Saner H, Wood D, Piepoli MF, Corrà U, Benzer W, Bjarnason-Wehrens B, Dendale P, Gaita D, McGee H, Mendes M, Niebauer J, Zwisler AD, Schmid JP: Document Reviewers: Secondary prevention through cardiac rehabilitation: physical activity counselling and exercise training: key components of the position paper from the Cardiac Rehabilitation Section of the European Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation. Eur Heart J 2010, 31:1967-1974.
• [35]Muller-Riemenschneider F, Meinhard C, Damm K, Vauth C, Bockelbrink A, Greiner W, Willich SN: Effectiveness of nonpharmacological secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2010, 17:688-700.
• [36]Bjarnason-Wehrens B, McGee H, Zwisler AD, Piepoli MF, Benzer W, Schmid JP, Dendale P, Pogosova NG, Zdrenghea D, Niebauer J, Mendes M: Cardiac Rehabilitation Section European Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation: Cardiac rehabilitation in Europe: results from the European Cardiac Rehabilitation Inventory Survey. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2010, 17:410-418.
• [37]van Engen-Verheul M, de Vries H, Kemps H, Kraaijenhagen R, de Keizer N, Peek N: Cardiac rehabilitation uptake and its determinants in the Netherlands. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2013, 20:349-356.
• [38]van Engen-Verheul MM, de Rijk A, Peek N: Dutch Clinical Algorithm for Assessment of Patient Needs in Cardiac Rehabilitation and Secondary Prevention (in Dutch). Netherlands Society for Cardiology (NVVC), Utrecht; 2012.
• [39]van Engen-Verheul MM, van der Veer SN, de Keizer NF, Tjon Sjoe SW, van der Zwan EP, Peek N: A Web-based system to facilitate local, systematic quality improvement by multidisciplinary care teams: development and first experiences of CARDSS online. Stud Health Technol Inform 2013, 192:248-252.
• [40]Locke EA, Latham GP: Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. A 35-year odyssey. Am Psychol 2002, 57:705-717.
• [41]van Engen-Verheul M, de Keizer N, Hellemans I, Kraaijenhagen R, Hasman A, Peek N: Design of a continuous multifaceted guideline-implementation strategy based on computerized decision support. Stud Health Technol Inform 2010, 160:836-840.
• [42]Reulings PG, van der Lans S: Cardiac rehabilitation with lifestyle counselling after myocardial infarction: it helps, but not everyone undergoes it. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2012, 156:A5758. [Article in Dutch]
• [43]Mezzani A, Agostoni P, Cohen-Solal A, Corra U, Jegier A, Kouidi E, Mazic S, Meurin P, Piepoli M, Simon A, Laethem CV, Vanhees L: Standards for the use of cardiopulmonary exercise testing for the functional evaluation of cardiac patients: a report from the Exercise Physiology Section of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2009, 16:249-267.
• [44]Dixon T, Lim LL, Oldridge NB: The MacNew heart disease health-related quality of life instrument: reference data for users. Qual Life Res 2002, 11:173-183.
• [45]de Gucht V, van Elderen T, van der Kamp L, Oldridge N: Quality of life after myocardial infarction: translation and validation of the MacNew Questionnaire for a Dutch population. Qual Life Res 2004, 13:1483-1488.
• [46]Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B: A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med 2006, 166:1092-1097.
• [47]Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB: Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ primary care study. Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders. Patient Health Questionnaire. JAMA 1999, 282:1737-1744.
• [48]Beck AT, Epstein N, Brown G, Steer RA: An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: psychometric properties. J Consult Clin Psychol 1988, 56:893-897.
• [49]Beck AT, Steer RA, Ball R, Ranieri W: Comparison of beck depression inventories -IA and -II in psychiatric outpatients. J Pers Assess 1996, 67:588-597.
• [50]Spinhoven P, Ormel J, Sloekers PP, Kempen GI, Speckens AE, Van Hemert AM: A validation study of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in different groups of Dutch subjects. Psychol Med 1997, 27:363-370.
• [51]Zimet GD, Powell SS, Farley GK, Werkman S, Berkoff KA: Psychometric characteristics of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. J Pers Assess 1990, 55:610-617.
• [52]Pedersen SS, Spinder H, Erdman RA, Denollet J: Poor perceived social support in implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) patients and their partners: cross-validation of the multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Psychosomatics 2009, 50:461-467.
• [53]Mitchell PH, Powell L, Blumenthal J, Norten J, Ironson G, Pitula CR, Froelicher ES, Czajkowski S, Youngblood M, Huber M, Berkman LF: A short social support measure for patients recovering from myocardial infarction: the ENRICHD Social Support Inventory. J Cardiopulm Rehabil 2003, 23:398-403.
• [54]Douwes M, Hildebrandt VH: Questions on the amount of physical activity. Geneeskunde en Sport 2000, 33:9-16. [Article in Dutch]
• [55]De Rick A, Vanheule S: Pilot study: does the Five Shot Questionnaire give an indication of the severity of alcohol use-related problems? Subst Use Misuse 2007, 42:1593-1601.
• [56]Seppa K, Lepisto J, Sillanaukee P: Five-shot questionnaire on heavy drinking. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1998, 22:1788-1791.
• [57]Campbell MK, Fayers PM, Grimshaw JM: Determinants of the intracluster correlation coefficient in cluster randomized trials: the case of implementation research. Clin Trials 2005, 2:99-107.
• [58]Pinheiro JC, Bates DM: Mixed Effects Models in S and S-plus. Springer, New-York; 2000.
• [59]Kane M, Trochim WMK: Concept Mapping for Planning and Evaluation. SAGE Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA; 2007.
• [60]Concept Systems Inc: Concept Systems Software v 4.0; 2013. [http://www.conceptsystems.com/content/view/the-concept-system.html], Date accessed 04-09-2013.
• [61]Dutch Trial Register: Implementation of the Cardiac Rehabilitation (CR) Guidelines by a Multifaceted Decision Support, Feedback and Outreach Visit Intervention: A Cluster Randomized Trial; 2012. http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=3251 (last accessed 01-06-2013).