Cargando…

Perceptions of Public and Nonpublic Reporting of Interventional Cardiology Outcomes and Its Impact on Practice: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program

BACKGROUND: Physicians have expressed significant mistrust with public reporting of interventional cardiology outcomes. Similar data are not available on alternative reporting structures, including nonpublic quality improvement programs with internally distributed measures of interventional quality....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Morrison, Justin, Plomondon, Mary E., O'Donnell, Colin I., Giri, Jay, Doll, Jacob A., Valle, Javier A., Waldo, Stephen W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6915263/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31711384
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.014212
_version_ 1783479975386546176
author Morrison, Justin
Plomondon, Mary E.
O'Donnell, Colin I.
Giri, Jay
Doll, Jacob A.
Valle, Javier A.
Waldo, Stephen W.
author_facet Morrison, Justin
Plomondon, Mary E.
O'Donnell, Colin I.
Giri, Jay
Doll, Jacob A.
Valle, Javier A.
Waldo, Stephen W.
author_sort Morrison, Justin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Physicians have expressed significant mistrust with public reporting of interventional cardiology outcomes. Similar data are not available on alternative reporting structures, including nonpublic quality improvement programs with internally distributed measures of interventional quality. We thus sought to evaluate the perceptions of public and nonpublic reporting of interventional cardiology outcomes and its impact on clinical practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: A standardized survey was distributed to 218 interventional cardiologists in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, with responses received from 62 (28%). The majority of respondents (90%) expressed some or a great deal of trust in the analytic methods used to generate reports in a nonpublic quality improvement system within Veterans Affairs, while a minority (35%) expressed similar trust in the analytic methods in a public reporting system that operates outside Veterans Affairs (P<0.001). Similarly, a minority of respondents (44%) felt that in‐hospital and 30‐day mortality accurately reflected interventional quality in a nonpublic quality improvement system, though a smaller proportion of survey participants (15%) felt that the same outcome reflected procedural quality in public reporting systems (P<0.001). Despite these sentiments, the majority of operators did not feel pressured to avoid (82% and 75%; P=0.383) or perform (72% and 63%; P=0.096) high‐risk procedures within or outside Veterans Affairs. CONCLUSIONS: Interventional cardiologists express greater trust in analytic methods and clinical outcomes reported in a nonpublic quality improvement program than external public reporting environments. The majority of physicians did not feel pressured to avoid or perform high‐risk procedures, which may improve access to interventional care among high‐risk patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6915263
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69152632019-12-23 Perceptions of Public and Nonpublic Reporting of Interventional Cardiology Outcomes and Its Impact on Practice: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program Morrison, Justin Plomondon, Mary E. O'Donnell, Colin I. Giri, Jay Doll, Jacob A. Valle, Javier A. Waldo, Stephen W. J Am Heart Assoc Brief Communication BACKGROUND: Physicians have expressed significant mistrust with public reporting of interventional cardiology outcomes. Similar data are not available on alternative reporting structures, including nonpublic quality improvement programs with internally distributed measures of interventional quality. We thus sought to evaluate the perceptions of public and nonpublic reporting of interventional cardiology outcomes and its impact on clinical practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: A standardized survey was distributed to 218 interventional cardiologists in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, with responses received from 62 (28%). The majority of respondents (90%) expressed some or a great deal of trust in the analytic methods used to generate reports in a nonpublic quality improvement system within Veterans Affairs, while a minority (35%) expressed similar trust in the analytic methods in a public reporting system that operates outside Veterans Affairs (P<0.001). Similarly, a minority of respondents (44%) felt that in‐hospital and 30‐day mortality accurately reflected interventional quality in a nonpublic quality improvement system, though a smaller proportion of survey participants (15%) felt that the same outcome reflected procedural quality in public reporting systems (P<0.001). Despite these sentiments, the majority of operators did not feel pressured to avoid (82% and 75%; P=0.383) or perform (72% and 63%; P=0.096) high‐risk procedures within or outside Veterans Affairs. CONCLUSIONS: Interventional cardiologists express greater trust in analytic methods and clinical outcomes reported in a nonpublic quality improvement program than external public reporting environments. The majority of physicians did not feel pressured to avoid or perform high‐risk procedures, which may improve access to interventional care among high‐risk patients. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-11-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6915263/ /pubmed/31711384 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.014212 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Brief Communication
Morrison, Justin
Plomondon, Mary E.
O'Donnell, Colin I.
Giri, Jay
Doll, Jacob A.
Valle, Javier A.
Waldo, Stephen W.
Perceptions of Public and Nonpublic Reporting of Interventional Cardiology Outcomes and Its Impact on Practice: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program
title Perceptions of Public and Nonpublic Reporting of Interventional Cardiology Outcomes and Its Impact on Practice: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program
title_full Perceptions of Public and Nonpublic Reporting of Interventional Cardiology Outcomes and Its Impact on Practice: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program
title_fullStr Perceptions of Public and Nonpublic Reporting of Interventional Cardiology Outcomes and Its Impact on Practice: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program
title_full_unstemmed Perceptions of Public and Nonpublic Reporting of Interventional Cardiology Outcomes and Its Impact on Practice: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program
title_short Perceptions of Public and Nonpublic Reporting of Interventional Cardiology Outcomes and Its Impact on Practice: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program
title_sort perceptions of public and nonpublic reporting of interventional cardiology outcomes and its impact on practice: insights from the veterans affairs clinical assessment, reporting, and tracking program
topic Brief Communication
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6915263/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31711384
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.014212
work_keys_str_mv AT morrisonjustin perceptionsofpublicandnonpublicreportingofinterventionalcardiologyoutcomesanditsimpactonpracticeinsightsfromtheveteransaffairsclinicalassessmentreportingandtrackingprogram
AT plomondonmarye perceptionsofpublicandnonpublicreportingofinterventionalcardiologyoutcomesanditsimpactonpracticeinsightsfromtheveteransaffairsclinicalassessmentreportingandtrackingprogram
AT odonnellcolini perceptionsofpublicandnonpublicreportingofinterventionalcardiologyoutcomesanditsimpactonpracticeinsightsfromtheveteransaffairsclinicalassessmentreportingandtrackingprogram
AT girijay perceptionsofpublicandnonpublicreportingofinterventionalcardiologyoutcomesanditsimpactonpracticeinsightsfromtheveteransaffairsclinicalassessmentreportingandtrackingprogram
AT dolljacoba perceptionsofpublicandnonpublicreportingofinterventionalcardiologyoutcomesanditsimpactonpracticeinsightsfromtheveteransaffairsclinicalassessmentreportingandtrackingprogram
AT vallejaviera perceptionsofpublicandnonpublicreportingofinterventionalcardiologyoutcomesanditsimpactonpracticeinsightsfromtheveteransaffairsclinicalassessmentreportingandtrackingprogram
AT waldostephenw perceptionsofpublicandnonpublicreportingofinterventionalcardiologyoutcomesanditsimpactonpracticeinsightsfromtheveteransaffairsclinicalassessmentreportingandtrackingprogram