Cargando…

An audit tool for assessing the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy

BACKGROUND: To update appropriateness ratings for carotid endarterectomy using the best clinical evidence and to develop a tool to audit the procedure's use. METHODS: A nine-member expert panel drawn from all the Canadian Specialist societies that are involved in the care of patients with carot...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kennedy, James, Quan, Hude, Feasby, Thomas E, Ghali, William A
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2004
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC481077/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15238169
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-4-17
_version_ 1782121656142004224
author Kennedy, James
Quan, Hude
Feasby, Thomas E
Ghali, William A
author_facet Kennedy, James
Quan, Hude
Feasby, Thomas E
Ghali, William A
author_sort Kennedy, James
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To update appropriateness ratings for carotid endarterectomy using the best clinical evidence and to develop a tool to audit the procedure's use. METHODS: A nine-member expert panel drawn from all the Canadian Specialist societies that are involved in the care of patients with carotid artery disease, used the RAND Appropriateness Methodology to rate scenarios where carotid endarterectomy may be performed. A 9-point rating scale was used that permits the categorization of the use of carotid endarterectomy as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate. A descriptive analysis was undertaken of the final results of the panel meeting. A database and code were then developed to rate all carotid endarterectomies performed in a Western Canadian Health region from 1997 to 2001. RESULTS: All scenarios for severe symptomatic stenosis (70–99%) were determined to be appropriate. The ratings for moderate symptomatic stenosis (50–69%) ranged from appropriate to inappropriate. It was never considered appropriate to perform endarterectomy for mild stenosis (0–49%) or for chronic occlusions. Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid disease was thought to be of uncertain benefit at best. The majority of indications for the combination of endarterectomy either prior to, or at time of coronary artery bypass grafting were inappropriate. The audit tool classified 98.0% of all cases. CONCLUSIONS: These expert panel ratings, based on the best evidence currently available, provide a comprehensive and updated guide to appropriate use of carotid endarterectomy. The resulting audit tool can be downloaded by readers from the Internet and immediately used for hospital audits of carotid endarterectomy appropriateness.
format Text
id pubmed-481077
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2004
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-4810772004-07-23 An audit tool for assessing the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy Kennedy, James Quan, Hude Feasby, Thomas E Ghali, William A BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: To update appropriateness ratings for carotid endarterectomy using the best clinical evidence and to develop a tool to audit the procedure's use. METHODS: A nine-member expert panel drawn from all the Canadian Specialist societies that are involved in the care of patients with carotid artery disease, used the RAND Appropriateness Methodology to rate scenarios where carotid endarterectomy may be performed. A 9-point rating scale was used that permits the categorization of the use of carotid endarterectomy as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate. A descriptive analysis was undertaken of the final results of the panel meeting. A database and code were then developed to rate all carotid endarterectomies performed in a Western Canadian Health region from 1997 to 2001. RESULTS: All scenarios for severe symptomatic stenosis (70–99%) were determined to be appropriate. The ratings for moderate symptomatic stenosis (50–69%) ranged from appropriate to inappropriate. It was never considered appropriate to perform endarterectomy for mild stenosis (0–49%) or for chronic occlusions. Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid disease was thought to be of uncertain benefit at best. The majority of indications for the combination of endarterectomy either prior to, or at time of coronary artery bypass grafting were inappropriate. The audit tool classified 98.0% of all cases. CONCLUSIONS: These expert panel ratings, based on the best evidence currently available, provide a comprehensive and updated guide to appropriate use of carotid endarterectomy. The resulting audit tool can be downloaded by readers from the Internet and immediately used for hospital audits of carotid endarterectomy appropriateness. BioMed Central 2004-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC481077/ /pubmed/15238169 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-4-17 Text en Copyright © 2004 Kennedy et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kennedy, James
Quan, Hude
Feasby, Thomas E
Ghali, William A
An audit tool for assessing the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy
title An audit tool for assessing the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy
title_full An audit tool for assessing the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy
title_fullStr An audit tool for assessing the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy
title_full_unstemmed An audit tool for assessing the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy
title_short An audit tool for assessing the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy
title_sort audit tool for assessing the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC481077/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15238169
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-4-17
work_keys_str_mv AT kennedyjames anaudittoolforassessingtheappropriatenessofcarotidendarterectomy
AT quanhude anaudittoolforassessingtheappropriatenessofcarotidendarterectomy
AT feasbythomase anaudittoolforassessingtheappropriatenessofcarotidendarterectomy
AT ghaliwilliama anaudittoolforassessingtheappropriatenessofcarotidendarterectomy
AT kennedyjames audittoolforassessingtheappropriatenessofcarotidendarterectomy
AT quanhude audittoolforassessingtheappropriatenessofcarotidendarterectomy
AT feasbythomase audittoolforassessingtheappropriatenessofcarotidendarterectomy
AT ghaliwilliama audittoolforassessingtheappropriatenessofcarotidendarterectomy