An Educational Intervention, Involving Feedback of Routinely Collected Computer Data, to Improve Cardiovascular Disease Management in UK Primary Care

Summary

Objectives: To report the lessons learned from eight years of feeding back routinely collected cardiovascular data in an educational context

Methods: There are distinct educational and technical components. The educational component provides peer-led learning opportunities based on comparative analysis of quality of care, as represented in computer records. The technical part ensures that relevant evidence-based audit criteria are identified; an appropriate dataset is extracted and processed to facilitate quality improvement. Anonymised data are used to provide inter-practice comparisons, with lists of identifiable patients who need interventions left in individual practices.

Results: The progressive improvement in cholesterol management in ischaemic heart disease (IHD) is used as an exemplar of the changes achieved. Over three iterations of the cardiovascular programme the standardised prevalence of IHD recorded in GP computer systems rose from 3.8% to 4.0%. Cholesterol recording rose from 47.6% to 89.0%; and the mean cholesterol level fell from 5.18 to 4.67 mmol/L; while statin prescribing rose from 46% to 57% to 68%. The atrial fibrillation, heart failure and renal programmes (more people with chronic kidney disease go on to die from cardiovascular cause than from end-stage renal disease) are used to demonstrate the range of cardiovascular interventions amenable to this approach.

Conclusions: Technical progress has meant that larger datasets can be extracted and processed. Feedback of routinely collected data in an educational context is acceptable to practitioners and results in quality improvement. Further research is needed to assess its utility as a strategy and cost-effectiveness compared with other methods.

Keywords

Computers - ischemic heart disease - quality of healthcare - computerised medical record systems - cholesterol

• References

• 1 Department of Health.. Primary Care Contracting – Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF). URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/PolicyAndGuidance/OrganisationPolicy/PrimaryCare/PrimaryCare Contracting/fs/en.
• 2 de Lusignan S, van Wheel C. The use of routinely collected computer data for research in primary care: opportunities and challenges. Fam Pract 2006; 23 (Suppl. 02) 253-63.
• 3 de Lusignan S, Wells S, Hague N, Thiru K. Managers see the problems associated with coding clinical data as a technical issue whilst clinicians also see cultural barriers. Methods Inf Med. 2003; 42 (Suppl. 04) 416-22.
• 4 Falconer E, de Lusignan S. An eight step method for assessing diagnostic data quality in practice: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as an exemplar. Informatics in Primary Care 2004; 12 (Suppl. 04) 243-53.
• 5 de Lusignan S, Valentin T, Chan T, Hague N, Wood O, Dhoul N. Problems with primary care data quality: Osteoporosis as an exemplar. Informatics in Primary Care 2004; 12 (Suppl. 03) 147-56.
• 6 de Lusignan S, Belsey J, Hague N, Dhoul N, van Vlymen J. The “rule of halves” still applies to the management of cholesterol in cardiovascular disease : 2002-2005. British Journal of Cardiology 2006; 13 (Suppl. 02) 145-52.
• 7 de Lusignan S, Belsey J, Hague N, Dzregah B. End digit preference in blood pressure recordings of patients with ischaemic heart disease in primary care. Journal of Human Hypertension 2004; 18: 261-5.
• 8 de Lusignan S, Hague N, Brown A, Majeed A. An educational intervention to improve data recording in the management of ischaemic heart disease in primary care. Journal of Public Health 2004; 28 (Suppl. 01) 34-7.
• 9 de Lusignan S, Van Vlymen J, Hague N, Thana L, Chan T, Dzregah B. Preventing stroke in people with atrial fibrillation: a cross-sectional study. J Public Health (Oxf) 2005; 27 (Suppl. 01) 85-92.
• 10 Rogers E. Diffusion of Innovations. 4th ed. New York: Free Press;; 1995
• 11 Berwick DM. Disseminating innovations in health care. JAMA 2003; 289 (Suppl. 015) 1969-75.
• 12 Soumerai SB, Avorn J. Principles of educational outreach (‘academic detailing’) to improve clinical decision making. JAMA 1990; 263 (Suppl. 04) 549-56.
• 13 Davis D. Clinical practice guidelines and the translation of knowledge: the science of continuing medical education. CMAJ 2000; 163 (Suppl. 010) 1278-9.
• 14 NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York.. Getting evidence into practice. Effective Healthcare 1999 51 URL: http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/ehc51.pdf.
• 15 Law MR, Wald NJ, Rudnicka AR. Quantifying effect of statins on low density lipoprotein cholesterol, ischaemic heart disease, and stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2003; 326 07404 1423.
• 16 Stewart S, Murphy N, Walker A, McGuire A, McMurray JJ. Cost of an emerging epidemic: an economic analysis of atrial fibrillation in the UK. Heart 2004; 90 (Suppl. 03) 286-92.
• 17 John RI, Webb MC, Young A, Stevens PE. Unreferred chronic kidney disease: A longitudinal study. Am J Kidney Dis 2004; 43: 825-35.
• 18 Coresh J, Astor BC, Greene T, Eknoyan G, Levey AS. Prevalence of chronic kidney disease and decreased kidney function in the adult US population: Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Am J Kidney Dis 2003; 41 (Suppl. 01) 1-12.
• 19 de Lusignan S, Chan T, Stevens P, O’Donoghue D, Hague N, Dzregah B, Van Vlymen J, Walker M, Hilton S. Identifying patients with chronic kidney disease from general practice computer records. Fam Pract 2005; 22 (Suppl. 03) 234-41.
• 20 van Vlymen J, de Lusignan S. Ensuring the quality of aggregated general practice data: lessons from the Primary Care Data Quality Programme (PCDQ). MIE Europe; 2005
• 21 Berndt DJ, Fisher JW, Hevner AR, Studinicki J. Healthcare data warehousing and quality assurance. IEEE Computer 2001; 34 (Suppl. 012) 56-65.
• 22 Wang RY, Strong DM. Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. Journal of Management Information Systems 1996; 12 (Suppl. 04) 5-34.
• 23 Clinical Information Consultancy.. MIQUEST and Health query language. URL:. http://www.clininfo.co.uk/main/miquest.htm.
• 24 de Lusignan S, Teasdale S. Data quality probes as used display many of the features of an effective data quality programme. Journal Informatics in Primary Care 2003; 11 (Suppl. 04) 234-7.
• 25 Department of Health.. National Service Framework for Coronary Heart Disease (Ref: 166021P30K). London: Department of Health; 2000. URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/PolicyAnd/Guidance/HealthAndSocialCareTopics/CoronaryHeartDisease/fs/en.
• 26 British Medical Association, Royal Pharmaceutical Society.. British National Formulary (BNF). URL: http://www.bnf.org.
• 27 de Lusignan S, Hague N, Belsey J, van Vlymen J. Progressive achievement of cholesterol targets in general practice makes further reductions feasible: report of cross-sectional data 2002-4. URL: http://www.pcel.info/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.indexcard&id=1263.
• 28 de Lusignan S, Hague N, Yates C, Harvey M. A case study from a Sussex Primary Care Group: improving secondary prevention in coronary heart disease using an educational intervention. British Journal of Cardiology 2002; 9 (Suppl. 06) 362-8.
• 29 SIGN (Scottish Inter-collegiate Guidelines Network) Publication Number 36.. Antithrombotic Therapy;. pp 19-22 URL: http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign36.pdf.
• 30 Freeman AC, Sweeney K. Why general practitioners do not implement evidence: qualitative study. BMJ 2001; 323: 1100-2.
• 31 Drey N, Roderick P, Mullee M, Rogerson M. A population-based study of the incidence and outcomes of diagnosed chronic kidney disease. Am J Kidney Dis 2003; 42: 677-84.
• 32 The sixth report of the Joint National Committee on prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157 (Suppl. 021) 2413-46.
• 33 Anandarajah S, Tan T, de Lusignan S, Stevens P, O’Donoghue D, Wlker M, Hilton S. The validity of searching routinely collected general practice computer data to identify patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD): a manual review of 500 medical records. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2005; 20 (Suppl. 010) 2089-96.
• 34 National Health Service.. Connecting for Health. URL: http://www.cfh.nhs.uk.
• 35 Bott OJ, Ammenwerth E, Brigl B, Knaup P, Lang E, Pilgram R, Pfeifer B, Ruderich F, Wolff AC, Haux R, Kulikowski C. The challenge of ubiquitous computing in health care: technology, concepts and solutions. Findings from the IMIAYearbook of Medical Informatics 2005. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44 (Suppl. 03) 473-9.
• 36 Ashworth M, Jenkins M, Burgess K, Keynes H, Wallace M, Roberts D, Majeed A. Which general practices have higher list inflation? An exploratory study. Fam Pract 2005; 22 (Suppl. 05) 529-31.
• 37 Williams P, de Lusignan S. Quality points are not associated with the quality of care in stroke. Inform Prim Care 2006; 14 (Suppl. 01) 29-40.
• 38 Mitchell E, Sullivan F, Grimshaw JM, Donnan PT, Watt G. Improving management of hypertension in general practice: a randomised controlled trial of feedback derived from electronic patient data. Br J Gen Pract. 2005; 55 0511 94-101.
• 39 Brady AJ, Pittard JB, Grace JF, Robinson PJ. Clinical assessment alone will not benefit patients with coronary heart disease: failure to achieve cholesterol targets in 12,045 patients—the Healthwise II study. Int J Clin Pract 2005; 59 (Suppl. 03) 342-5.
• 40 Rigby M. Evaluation – The Cinderella Science of ICT in Health. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45 (Suppl. 01) 141-20.
• 41 Knaup P. Electronic Patient Records and their Benefit for Patient Care. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45 [Suppl 1]: 40-2.