Cargando…

Evaluating key performance indicators of the process of care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether and how often the information to measure a set of key performance indicators (KPIs) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is found in data collected routinely in a Pediatric Rheumatology Clinic. METHODS: A retrospective electronic chart review and administrative data...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cooper, Sarah M., Currie, Gillian R., Kromm, Seija, Twilt, Marinka, Marshall, Deborah A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10120096/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37085775
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12969-023-00818-7
_version_ 1785029125529927680
author Cooper, Sarah M.
Currie, Gillian R.
Kromm, Seija
Twilt, Marinka
Marshall, Deborah A.
author_facet Cooper, Sarah M.
Currie, Gillian R.
Kromm, Seija
Twilt, Marinka
Marshall, Deborah A.
author_sort Cooper, Sarah M.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To determine whether and how often the information to measure a set of key performance indicators (KPIs) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is found in data collected routinely in a Pediatric Rheumatology Clinic. METHODS: A retrospective electronic chart review and administrative data analysis was conducted for a cohort of 140 patients with JIA at a tertiary Pediatric Rheumatology Clinic between 2016–2020. The set of KPIs include measuring patient outcomes (joint assessment, physician’s global assessment of disease activity, assessment of functional ability, composite disease activity measurement), access to care (waiting time between referral and first visit, visit with the rheumatologist within the first year of diagnosis, annual follow-up visits with the rheumatologist), and safety (tuberculosis screening, and laboratory monitoring). Documentation was assessed as a binary variable indicating whether the required information was ever found. Documentation frequency for each KPI was assessed with counts and percentages of the number of times the required information was documented for each clinic visit. Compliance with the safety KPI definitions was assessed using administrative databases. RESULTS: Data for each KPI were found at least once in the cohort and documentation varied in frequency and consistency. Access to care and safety KPIs were documented more frequently than patient outcome KPIs. A joint assessment was documented at every visit for 95% of patients, 46% for an assessment of pain, and none for a physician’s global assessment of disease activity, an assessment of functional ability, or a composite disease activity measurement. CONCLUSION: Although feasible to measure, there is an opportunity for improving the consistency of documentation. Having an active system of monitoring KPIs and tools to simplify measurement is a key step in the process toward improved patient care outcomes. Streamlining the collection of KPI data can increase the likelihood of compliance. Next steps should involve replicating this study in various centres.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10120096
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101200962023-04-22 Evaluating key performance indicators of the process of care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis Cooper, Sarah M. Currie, Gillian R. Kromm, Seija Twilt, Marinka Marshall, Deborah A. Pediatr Rheumatol Online J Research Article OBJECTIVE: To determine whether and how often the information to measure a set of key performance indicators (KPIs) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is found in data collected routinely in a Pediatric Rheumatology Clinic. METHODS: A retrospective electronic chart review and administrative data analysis was conducted for a cohort of 140 patients with JIA at a tertiary Pediatric Rheumatology Clinic between 2016–2020. The set of KPIs include measuring patient outcomes (joint assessment, physician’s global assessment of disease activity, assessment of functional ability, composite disease activity measurement), access to care (waiting time between referral and first visit, visit with the rheumatologist within the first year of diagnosis, annual follow-up visits with the rheumatologist), and safety (tuberculosis screening, and laboratory monitoring). Documentation was assessed as a binary variable indicating whether the required information was ever found. Documentation frequency for each KPI was assessed with counts and percentages of the number of times the required information was documented for each clinic visit. Compliance with the safety KPI definitions was assessed using administrative databases. RESULTS: Data for each KPI were found at least once in the cohort and documentation varied in frequency and consistency. Access to care and safety KPIs were documented more frequently than patient outcome KPIs. A joint assessment was documented at every visit for 95% of patients, 46% for an assessment of pain, and none for a physician’s global assessment of disease activity, an assessment of functional ability, or a composite disease activity measurement. CONCLUSION: Although feasible to measure, there is an opportunity for improving the consistency of documentation. Having an active system of monitoring KPIs and tools to simplify measurement is a key step in the process toward improved patient care outcomes. Streamlining the collection of KPI data can increase the likelihood of compliance. Next steps should involve replicating this study in various centres. BioMed Central 2023-04-21 /pmc/articles/PMC10120096/ /pubmed/37085775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12969-023-00818-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cooper, Sarah M.
Currie, Gillian R.
Kromm, Seija
Twilt, Marinka
Marshall, Deborah A.
Evaluating key performance indicators of the process of care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis
title Evaluating key performance indicators of the process of care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis
title_full Evaluating key performance indicators of the process of care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis
title_fullStr Evaluating key performance indicators of the process of care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating key performance indicators of the process of care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis
title_short Evaluating key performance indicators of the process of care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis
title_sort evaluating key performance indicators of the process of care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10120096/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37085775
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12969-023-00818-7
work_keys_str_mv AT coopersarahm evaluatingkeyperformanceindicatorsoftheprocessofcareinjuvenileidiopathicarthritis
AT curriegillianr evaluatingkeyperformanceindicatorsoftheprocessofcareinjuvenileidiopathicarthritis
AT krommseija evaluatingkeyperformanceindicatorsoftheprocessofcareinjuvenileidiopathicarthritis
AT twiltmarinka evaluatingkeyperformanceindicatorsoftheprocessofcareinjuvenileidiopathicarthritis
AT marshalldeboraha evaluatingkeyperformanceindicatorsoftheprocessofcareinjuvenileidiopathicarthritis