Cargando…

Developing process measures in value-based healthcare: the case of aortic valve disease

BACKGROUND: As process measures can be means to change practices, this article presents process measures that impact on outcome measures for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) within value-based healthcare. METHODS: Desk research and observatio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Akmaz, Berdel, Zipfel, Nina, Bal, Roland A, Rensing, Benno J W M, Daeter, Edgar J, van der Nat, Paul B
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6863668/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31799447
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2019-000716
_version_ 1783471745536098304
author Akmaz, Berdel
Zipfel, Nina
Bal, Roland A
Rensing, Benno J W M
Daeter, Edgar J
van der Nat, Paul B
author_facet Akmaz, Berdel
Zipfel, Nina
Bal, Roland A
Rensing, Benno J W M
Daeter, Edgar J
van der Nat, Paul B
author_sort Akmaz, Berdel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: As process measures can be means to change practices, this article presents process measures that impact on outcome measures for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) within value-based healthcare. METHODS: Desk research and observations of patient trajectories were performed to map the processes involved in TAVR and SAVR. Semistructured interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals (n=8) and patients (n=2) to explore which processes were most important in relation to a standard set of outcome measures that was already monitored. Additionally, open interviews (n=2) were held to prioritise results. A focus group was performed for validation of the formulated process measures. Numerical data for these measures was not collected. RESULTS: Process maps of the full cycle of care of TAVR and SAVR treatments in theory and in practice were developed. 28 processes were found important by interview participants due to their expected impact on patient-relevant outcomes. Seven processes were prioritised to be most important and were formulated into 12 process measures for both TAVR and SAVR: ‘Number of times that deficient information provision to SAVR patients causes negative outcomes’, ‘Type of TAVR/SAVR prosthesis’, ‘Brand of TAVR prosthesis’, ‘Number of times the frailty score of a TAVR/SAVR patient >75 years is measured’, ‘Time between TAVR/SAVR surgery indication and surgery’, ‘Number of times that anticoagulants are stopped within 3 days before surgery’, ‘Time in hours between TAVR/SAVR surgery and permanent pacemaker implantation’ and ‘Percentage of standardised pain measurements’. CONCLUSION: This study proposes an addition of select process measures to standard sets of outcome measures to improve healthcare quality. It illustrates a clear method for identifying process measures with impact on health outcomes in the future.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6863668
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68636682019-12-03 Developing process measures in value-based healthcare: the case of aortic valve disease Akmaz, Berdel Zipfel, Nina Bal, Roland A Rensing, Benno J W M Daeter, Edgar J van der Nat, Paul B BMJ Open Qual Original Research BACKGROUND: As process measures can be means to change practices, this article presents process measures that impact on outcome measures for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) within value-based healthcare. METHODS: Desk research and observations of patient trajectories were performed to map the processes involved in TAVR and SAVR. Semistructured interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals (n=8) and patients (n=2) to explore which processes were most important in relation to a standard set of outcome measures that was already monitored. Additionally, open interviews (n=2) were held to prioritise results. A focus group was performed for validation of the formulated process measures. Numerical data for these measures was not collected. RESULTS: Process maps of the full cycle of care of TAVR and SAVR treatments in theory and in practice were developed. 28 processes were found important by interview participants due to their expected impact on patient-relevant outcomes. Seven processes were prioritised to be most important and were formulated into 12 process measures for both TAVR and SAVR: ‘Number of times that deficient information provision to SAVR patients causes negative outcomes’, ‘Type of TAVR/SAVR prosthesis’, ‘Brand of TAVR prosthesis’, ‘Number of times the frailty score of a TAVR/SAVR patient >75 years is measured’, ‘Time between TAVR/SAVR surgery indication and surgery’, ‘Number of times that anticoagulants are stopped within 3 days before surgery’, ‘Time in hours between TAVR/SAVR surgery and permanent pacemaker implantation’ and ‘Percentage of standardised pain measurements’. CONCLUSION: This study proposes an addition of select process measures to standard sets of outcome measures to improve healthcare quality. It illustrates a clear method for identifying process measures with impact on health outcomes in the future. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-11-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6863668/ /pubmed/31799447 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2019-000716 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Akmaz, Berdel
Zipfel, Nina
Bal, Roland A
Rensing, Benno J W M
Daeter, Edgar J
van der Nat, Paul B
Developing process measures in value-based healthcare: the case of aortic valve disease
title Developing process measures in value-based healthcare: the case of aortic valve disease
title_full Developing process measures in value-based healthcare: the case of aortic valve disease
title_fullStr Developing process measures in value-based healthcare: the case of aortic valve disease
title_full_unstemmed Developing process measures in value-based healthcare: the case of aortic valve disease
title_short Developing process measures in value-based healthcare: the case of aortic valve disease
title_sort developing process measures in value-based healthcare: the case of aortic valve disease
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6863668/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31799447
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2019-000716
work_keys_str_mv AT akmazberdel developingprocessmeasuresinvaluebasedhealthcarethecaseofaorticvalvedisease
AT zipfelnina developingprocessmeasuresinvaluebasedhealthcarethecaseofaorticvalvedisease
AT balrolanda developingprocessmeasuresinvaluebasedhealthcarethecaseofaorticvalvedisease
AT rensingbennojwm developingprocessmeasuresinvaluebasedhealthcarethecaseofaorticvalvedisease
AT daeteredgarj developingprocessmeasuresinvaluebasedhealthcarethecaseofaorticvalvedisease
AT vandernatpaulb developingprocessmeasuresinvaluebasedhealthcarethecaseofaorticvalvedisease