Benchmarking clinical indicators of quality for Australian residential aged care facilities

To undertake exploratory benchmarking of a set of clinical indicators of quality care in residential care in Australia, data were collected from 107 residents within four medium-sized facilities (40–80 beds) in Brisbane, Australia. The proportion of residents in each sample facility with a particular clinical problem was compared with US Minimum Data Set quality indicator thresholds. Results demonstrated variability within and between clinical indicators, suggesting breadth of assessment using various clinical indicators of quality is an important factor when monitoring quality of care. More comprehensive and objective measures of quality of care would be of great assistance in determining and monitoring the effectiveness of residential aged care provision in Australia, particularly as demands for accountability by consumers and their families increase. What is known about the topic? The key to quality improvement is effective quality assessment, and one means of evaluating quality of care is through clinical outcomes. The Minimum Data Set quality indicators have been credited with improving quality in United States nursing homes. What does this paper add? The Clinical Care Indicators Tool was used to collect data on clinical outcomes, enabling comparison of data from a small Australian sample with American quality benchmarks to illustrate the utility of providing guidelines for interpretation. What are the implications for practitioners? Collecting and comparing clinical outcome data would enable practitioners to better understand the quality of care being provided and whether practices required review. The Clinical Care Indicator Tool could provide a comprehensive and systematic means of doing this, thus filling a gap in quality monitoring within Australian residential aged care.

Clinical indicators of quality for Australian residential aged care facilities : establishing reliability, validity, and quality thresholds

Background: In response to the need for more comprehensive quality assessment within Australian residential aged care facilities, the Clinical Care Indicator (CCI) Tool was developed to collect outcome data as a means of making inferences about quality. A national trial of its effectiveness and a Brisbane-based trial of its use within the quality improvement context determined the CCI Tool represented a potentially valuable addition to the Australian aged care system. This document describes the next phase in the CCI Tool.s development; the aims of which were to establish validity and reliability of the CCI Tool, and to develop quality indicator thresholds (benchmarks) for use in Australia. The CCI Tool is now known as the ResCareQA (Residential Care Quality Assessment). Methods: The study aims were achieved through a combination of quantitative data analysis, and expert panel consultations using modified Delphi process. The expert panel consisted of experienced aged care clinicians, managers, and academics; they were initially consulted to determine face and content validity of the ResCareQA, and later to develop thresholds of quality. To analyse its psychometric properties, ResCareQA forms were completed for all residents (N=498) of nine aged care facilities throughout Queensland. Kappa statistics were used to assess inter-rater and test-retest reliability, and Cronbach.s alpha coefficient calculated to determine internal consistency. For concurrent validity, equivalent items on the ResCareQA and the Resident Classification Scales (RCS) were compared using Spearman.s rank order correlations, while discriminative validity was assessed using known-groups technique, comparing ResCareQA results between groups with differing care needs, as well as between male and female residents. Rank-ordered facility results for each clinical care indicator (CCI) were circulated to the panel; upper and lower thresholds for each CCI were nominated by panel members and refined through a Delphi process. These thresholds indicate excellent care at one extreme and questionable care at the other. Results: Minor modifications were made to the assessment, and it was renamed the ResCareQA. Agreement on its content was reached after two Delphi rounds; the final version contains 24 questions across four domains, enabling generation of 36 CCIs. Both test-retest and inter-rater reliability were sound with median kappa values of 0.74 (test-retest) and 0.91 (inter-rater); internal consistency was not as strong, with a Chronbach.s alpha of 0.46. Because the ResCareQA does not provide a single combined score, comparisons for concurrent validity were made with the RCS on an item by item basis, with most resultant correlations being quite low. Discriminative validity analyses, however, revealed highly significant differences in total number of CCIs between high care and low care groups (t199=10.77, p=0.000), while the differences between male and female residents were not significant (t414=0.56, p=0.58). Clinical outcomes varied both within and between facilities; agreed upper and lower thresholds were finalised after three Delphi rounds. Conclusions: The ResCareQA provides a comprehensive, easily administered means of monitoring quality in residential aged care facilities that can be reliably used on multiple occasions. The relatively modest internal consistency score was likely due to the multi-factorial nature of quality, and the absence of an aggregate result for the assessment. Measurement of concurrent validity proved difficult in the absence of a gold standard, but the sound discriminative validity results suggest that the ResCareQA has acceptable validity and could be confidently used as an indication of care quality within Australian residential aged care facilities. The thresholds, while preliminary due to small sample size, enable users to make judgements about quality within and between facilities. Thus it is recommended the ResCareQA be adopted for wider use.

Why we need a population-based approach to clinical indicators for cancer: a case study using microscopic confirmation of lung cancer in Queensland

An important function of clinical cancer registries is to provide feedback to clinicians on various performance measures. To date, most clinical cancer registries in Australia are located in tertiary academic hospitals, where adherence to guidelines is probably already high. Microscopic confirmation is an important process measure for lung cancer care. We found that the proportion of patients with lung cancer without microscopic confirmation was much higher in regional public hospitals (27.1%) than in tertiary hospitals (7.5%), and this disparity remained after adjusting for age, sex and comorbidities. The percentage was also higher in the private than in the public sector. This case study shows that we need a population-based approach to measuring clinical indicators that includes regional public hospitals as a matter of priority and should ideally include the private sector.

Evaluation of respiratory parameters at presentation as clinical indicators of the respiratory localization in dogs and cats with respiratory distress

OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical respiratory parameters in cats and dogs with respiratory distress and identify associations between respiratory signs at presentation and localization of the disease with particular evaluation between the synchrony of abdominal and chest wall movements as a clinical indicators for pleural space disease. Design - Prospective observational clinical study. SETTING: Emergency service in a university veterinary teaching hospital. ANIMALS: Cats and dogs with respiratory distress presented to the emergency service between April 2008 and July 2009. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The following parameters were systematically determined at time of admission: respiratory rate, heart rate, temperature, type of breathing, movement of the thoracic and abdominal wall during inspiration, presence of stridor, presence and type of dyspnea, and results of thoracic auscultation. Abdominal and chest wall movement was categorized as synchronous, asynchronous, or inverse. Diagnostic test results, diagnosis, and outcome were subsequently recorded. Based on the final diagnoses, animals were assigned to 1 or more of the following groups regarding the anatomical localization of the respiratory distress: upper airways, lower airways, lung parenchyma, pleural space, thoracic wall, nonrespiratory causes, and normal animals. One hundred and seventy-six animals (103 cats and 73 dogs) were evaluated. Inspiratory dyspnea was associated with upper airway disease in dogs and expiratory dyspnea with lower airway disease in cats. Respiratory noises were significantly associated and highly sensitive and specific for upper airway disease. An asynchronous or inverse breathing pattern and decreased lung auscultation results were significantly associated with pleural space disease in both dogs and cats (P<0.001). The combination is highly sensitive (99%) but not very specific (45%). Fast and shallow breathing was not associated with pleural space disease. Increased or moist pulmonary auscultation findings were associated with parenchymal lung disease. CONCLUSIONS: Cats and dogs with pleural space disease can be identified by an asynchronous or inverse breathing pattern in combination with decreased lung sounds on auscultation.

Using clinical indicators in a quality improvement programme targeting cardiac care

Rationale. The Brisbane Cardiac Consortium, a quality improvement collaboration of clinicians from three hospitals and five divisions of general practice, developed and reported clinical indicators as measures of the quality of care received by patients with acute coronary syndromes or congestive heart failure. Development of indicators. An expert panel derived indicators that measured gaps between evidence and practice. Data collected from hospital records and general practice heart-check forms were used to calculate process and outcome indicators for each condition. Our indicators were reliable (kappa scores 0.7-1.0) and widely accepted by clinicians as having face validity. Independent review of indicator-failed, in-hospital cases revealed that, for 27 of 28 process indicators, clinically legitimate reasons for withholding specific interventions were found in

Development of a Systematic Approach to Assessing Quality within Australian Residential Aged Care Facilities: The Clinical Care Indicators Tool

Recent years have seen the introduction of formalised accreditation processes in both community and residential aged care, but these only partially address quality assessment within this sector. Residential aged care in Australia does not yet have a standardised system of resident assessment related to clinical, rather than administrative, outcomes. This paper describes the development of a quality assessment tool aimed at addressing this gap. Utilising previous research and the results of nominal groups with experts in the field, the 21-item Clinical Care Indicators (CCI) Tool for residential aged care was developed and trialled nationally. The CCI Tool was found to be simple to use and an effective means of collecting data on the state of resident health and care, with potential benefits for resident care planning and continuous quality improvement within facilities and organisations. The CCI Tool was further refined through a small intervention study to assess its utility as a quality improvement instrument and to investigate its relationship with resident quality of life. The current version covers 23 clinical indicators, takes about 30 minutes to complete and is viewed favourably by nursing staff who use it. Current work focuses on psychometric analysis and benchmarking, which should enable the CCI Tool to make a positive contribution to the measurement of quality in aged care in Australia.

Standardising practices improves clinical diabetic foot management: the Queensland Diabetic Foot Innovation Project, 2006-09

Objective. The aim of this paper is to report the clinical practice changes resulting from strategies to standardise diabetic foot clinical management in three diverse ambulatory service sites in Queensland, Australia. Methods. Multifaceted strategies were implemented in 2008, including: multidisciplinary teams, clinical pathways, clinical training, clinical indicators, and telehealth support. Prior to the intervention, none of the aforementioned strategies were used, except one site had a basic multidisciplinary team. A retrospective audit of consecutive patient records from July 2006 to June 2007 determined baseline clinical activity (n = 101).Aclinical pathway teleform was implemented as a clinical activity analyser in 2008 (n = 327) and followed up in 2009 (n = 406). Pre- and post-implementation data were analysed using Chi-square tests with a significance level set at P < 0.05. Results. There was an improvement in surveillance of the high risk population of 34% in 2008 and 19% in 2009, and treating according to risk of 15% in 2009 (P < 0.05). The documentation of all best-practice clinical activities performed improved 13–66% (P < 0.03). Conclusion. These findings support the use of multifaceted strategies to standardise practice and improve diabetic foot complications management in diverse ambulatory services.

Non-clinical outcomes of antiretroviral therapy for HIV/AIDS in developing countries: a systematic literature review

The impacts of antiretroviral therapy on quality of life, mental health, labor productivity, and economic wellbeing for people living with HIV/AIDS in developing countries are only beginning to be measured. We conducted a systematic literature review to analyze the effect of antiretroviral therapy (ART) on these non-clinical indicators in developing countries and assess the state of research on these topics. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were included, as were peer-reviewed articles, gray literature, and conference abstracts and presentations. Findings are reported from 12 full-length articles, 7 abstracts, and 1 presentation (representing 16 studies). Compared to HIV-positive patients not yet on treatment, patients on ART reported significant improvements in physical, emotional and mental health and daily function. Work performance improved and absenteeism decreased, with the most dramatic changes occurring in the first three months of treatment and then leveling off. Little research has been done on the impact of ART on household wellbeing, with modest changes in child and family wellbeing within households where adults are receiving ART reported so far. Studies from developing countries have not yet assessed non-clinical outcomes of therapy beyond the first year; therefore, longitudinal outcomes are still unknown. As ART roll out extends throughout high HIV prevalence, low-resource countries and is sustained over years and decades, both positive and adverse non-clinical outcomes need to be empirically measured and qualitatively explored in order to support patient adherence and maximize treatment benefits.

Correlation between oral health perception and clinical factors in a Brazilian community

Objective: The aim of this study was to analyse associations between self-perception of oral health and relevant clinical, personal and socio-demographic factors in a Brazilian community. Material And Methods: Urban adults living in a city in southern Brazil were interviewerd and examined. Individuals with acute pain and who needed multiple extractions of teeth were excluded. Self-perception and the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) were applied to measure the impact of oral conditions on the quality of life. Socio-demographic and clinical indicators were also analysed. Results: The clinical examination revealed a high dental caries experience (DMFT = 18.9) and a high prevalence of periodontal disease. Oral condition was considered normal by 42% of respondents. The variables associated with the OHIP-14 were: education, age, self-assessment, dental caries and the DMFT index. Conclusions: Self-perception of oral health was associated with OHIP-14 and the clinical indicators had low influence in the self-perception. Therefore, the development of educational initiatives and preventive strategies for the adult population is recommended. © BASCD 2011.

Investigating the utility of clinical assessments to predict success with presbyopic contact lens correction

PURPOSE: To determine the utility of a range of clinical and non-clinical indicators to aid the initial selection of the optimum presbyopic contact lens. In addition, to assess whether lens preference was influenced by the visual performance compared to the other designs trialled (intra-subject) or compared to participants who preferred other designs (inter-subject). METHODS: A double-masked randomised crossover trial of Air Optix Aqua multifocal, PureVision 2 for Presbyopia, Acuvue OASYS for Presbyopia, Biofinity multifocal and monovision was conducted on 35 presbyopes (54.3±6.2years). Participant lifestyle, personality, pupil characteristics and aberrometry were assessed prior to lens fitting. After 4 weeks of wear, high and low contrast visual acuity (VA) under photopic and mesopic conditions, reading speed, Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ) rating, subjective quality-of-vision scoring, defocus curves, stereopsis, halometry, aberrometry and ocular physiology were quantified. RESULTS: After trialling all the lenses, preference was mixed (n=12 Biofinity, n=10 monovision, n=7 Purevision, n=4 Air Optix Aqua, n=2 Oasys). Lens preference was not dependent on personality (F=1.182, p=0.323) or the hours spent working at near (p=0.535) or intermediate (p=0.759) distances. No intersubject or strong intrasubject relationships emerged between lens preference and reading speed, NAVQ rating, halo size, aberrometry or ocular physiology (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Participant lifestyle and personality, ocular optics, contact lens visual performance and ocular physiology provided poor indicators of the preferred lens type after 4 weeks of wear. This is confounded by the wide range of task visual demands of presbyopes and the limited optical differences between current multifocal contact lens designs.

Reference bias : presentation of extreme health states prior to EQ-VAS improves health-related quality of life scores. A randomised crossover trial.

Background: Clinical practice and clinical research has made a concerted effort to move beyond the use of clinical indicators alone and embrace patient focused care through the use of patient reported outcomes such as healthrelated quality of life. However, unless patients give consistent consideration to the health states that give meaning to measurement scales used to evaluate these constructs, longitudinal comparison of these measures may be invalid. This study aimed to investigate whether patients give consideration to a standard health state rating scale (EQ-VAS) and whether consideration of good and poor health state descriptors immediately changes their selfreport. Methods: A randomised crossover trial was implemented amongst hospitalised older adults (n = 151). Patients were asked to consider descriptions of extremely good (Description-A) and poor (Description-B) health states. The EQ-VAS was administered as a self-report at baseline, after the first descriptors (A or B), then again after the remaining descriptors (B or A respectively). At baseline patients were also asked if they had considered either EQVAS anchors. Results: Overall 106/151 (70%) participants changed their self-evaluation by ≥5 points on the 100 point VAS, with a mean (SD) change of +4.5 (12) points (p < 0.001). A total of 74/151 (49%) participants did not consider the best health VAS anchor, of the 77 who did 59 (77%) thought the good health descriptors were more extreme (better) then they had previously considered. Similarly 85/151 (66%) participants did not consider the worst health anchor of the 66 who did 63 (95%) thought the poor health descriptors were more extreme (worse) then they had previously considered. Conclusions: Health state self-reports may not be well considered. An immediate significant shift in response can be elicited by exposure to a mere description of an extreme health state despite no actual change in underlying health state occurring. Caution should be exercised in research and clinical settings when interpreting subjective patient reported outcomes that are dependent on brief anchors for meaning. Trial Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (#ACTRN12607000606482) http://www.anzctr. org.au

Evaluation of financial incentives as a quality improvement strategy in the public hospital context : clinician attitudes, design variables, and economic costs

In 2008, a three-year pilot ‘pay for performance’ (P4P) program, known as ‘Clinical Practice Improvement Payment’ (CPIP) was introduced into Queensland Health (QHealth). QHealth is a large public health sector provider of acute, community, and public health services in Queensland, Australia. The organisation has recently embarked on a significant reform agenda including a review of existing funding arrangements (Duckett et al., 2008). Partly in response to this reform agenda, a casemix funding model has been implemented to reconnect health care funding with outcomes. CPIP was conceptualised as a performance-based scheme that rewarded quality with financial incentives. This is the first time such a scheme has been implemented into the public health sector in Australia with a focus on rewarding quality, and it is unique in that it has a large state-wide focus and includes 15 Districts. CPIP initially targeted five acute and community clinical areas including Mental Health, Discharge Medication, Emergency Department, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Stroke. The CPIP scheme was designed around key concepts including the identification of clinical indicators that met the set criteria of: high disease burden, a well defined single diagnostic group or intervention, significant variations in clinical outcomes and/or practices, a good evidence, and clinician control and support (Ward, Daniels, Walker & Duckett, 2007). This evaluative research targeted Phase One of implementation of the CPIP scheme from January 2008 to March 2009. A formative evaluation utilising a mixed methodology and complementarity analysis was undertaken. The research involved three research questions and aimed to determine the knowledge, understanding, and attitudes of clinicians; identify improvements to the design, administration, and monitoring of CPIP; and determine the financial and economic costs of the scheme. Three key studies were undertaken to ascertain responses to the key research questions. Firstly, a survey of clinicians was undertaken to examine levels of knowledge and understanding and their attitudes to the scheme. Secondly, the study sought to apply Statistical Process Control (SPC) to the process indicators to assess if this enhanced the scheme and a third study examined a simple economic cost analysis. The CPIP Survey of clinicians elicited 192 clinician respondents. Over 70% of these respondents were supportive of the continuation of the CPIP scheme. This finding was also supported by the results of a quantitative altitude survey that identified positive attitudes in 6 of the 7 domains-including impact, awareness and understanding and clinical relevance, all being scored positive across the combined respondent group. SPC as a trending tool may play an important role in the early identification of indicator weakness for the CPIP scheme. This evaluative research study supports a previously identified need in the literature for a phased introduction of Pay for Performance (P4P) type programs. It further highlights the value of undertaking a formal risk assessment of clinician, management, and systemic levels of literacy and competency with measurement and monitoring of quality prior to a phased implementation. This phasing can then be guided by a P4P Design Variable Matrix which provides a selection of program design options such as indicator target and payment mechanisms. It became evident that a clear process is required to standardise how clinical indicators evolve over time and direct movement towards more rigorous ‘pay for performance’ targets and the development of an optimal funding model. Use of this matrix will enable the scheme to mature and build the literacy and competency of clinicians and the organisation as implementation progresses. Furthermore, the research identified that CPIP created a spotlight on clinical indicators and incentive payments of over five million from a potential ten million was secured across the five clinical areas in the first 15 months of the scheme. This indicates that quality was rewarded in the new QHealth funding model, and despite issues being identified with the payment mechanism, funding was distributed. The economic model used identified a relative low cost of reporting (under $8,000) as opposed to funds secured of over $300,000 for mental health as an example. Movement to a full cost effectiveness study of CPIP is supported. Overall the introduction of the CPIP scheme into QHealth has been a positive and effective strategy for engaging clinicians in quality and has been the catalyst for the identification and monitoring of valuable clinical process indicators. This research has highlighted that clinicians are supportive of the scheme in general; however, there are some significant risks that include the functioning of the CPIP payment mechanism. Given clinician support for the use of a pay–for-performance methodology in QHealth, the CPIP scheme has the potential to be a powerful addition to a multi-faceted suite of quality improvement initiatives within QHealth.

Standardising practices improves ambulatory diabetic foot management and reduces amputations : the Queensland Diabetic Foot Innovation Project, 2006 – 2009

Background Diabetic foot complications are recognised as the most common reason for diabetic related hospitalisation and lower extremity amputations. Multi-faceted strategies to reduce diabetic foot hospitalisation and amputation rates have been successful. However, most diabetic foot ulcers are managed in ambulatory settings where data availability is poor and studies limited. The project aimed to develop and evaluate strategies to improve the management of diabetic foot complications in three diverse ambulatory settings and measure the subsequent impact on ospitalisation and amputation. Methods Multifaceted strategies were implemented in 2008, including: multi-disciplinary teams, clinical pathways and training, clinical indicators, telehealth support and surveys. A retrospective audit of consecutive patient records from July 2006 – June 2007 determined baseline clinical indicators (n = 101). A clinical pathway teleform was implemented as a clinical record and clinical indicator analyser in all sites in 2008 (n = 327) and followed up in 2009 (n = 406). Results Prior to the intervention, clinical pathways were not used and multi-disciplinary teams were limited. There was an absolute improvement in treating according to risk of 15% in 2009 and surveillance of the high risk population of 34% and 19% in 2008 and 2009 respectively (p < 0.001). Improvements of 13 – 66% (p < 0.001) were recorded in 2008 for individual clinical activities to a performance > 92% in perfusion, ulcer depth, infection assessment and management, offloading and education. Hospitalisation impacts recorded reductions of up to 64% in amputation rates / 100,000 population (p < 0.001) and 24% average length of stay (p < 0.001) Conclusion These findings support the use of multi-faceted strategies in diverse ambulatory services to standardise practice, improve diabetic foot complications management and positively impact on hospitalisation outcomes. As of October 2010, these strategies had been rolled out to over 25 ambulatory sites, representing 66% of Queensland Health districts, managing 1,820 patients and 13,380 occasions of service, including 543 healed ulcer patients. It is expected that this number will rise dramatically as an incentive payment for the use of the teleform is expanded.

Queensland’s high risk foot database : tracking the length and width of Queensland’s foot ulcers

Background Foot ulcers are a leading cause of avoidable hospital admissions and lower extremity amputations. However, large clinical studies describing foot ulcer presentations in the ambulatory setting are limited. The aim of this descriptive observational paper is to report the characteristics of ambulatory foot ulcer patients managed across 13 of 17 Queensland Health & Hospital Services. Methods Data on all foot ulcer patients registered with a Queensland High Risk Foot Form (QHRFF) was collected at their first consult in 2012. Data is automatically extracted from each QHRFF into a Queensland high risk foot database. Descriptive statistics display age, sex, ulcer types and co-morbidities. Statewide clinical indicators of foot ulcer management are also reported. Results Overall, 2,034 people presented with a foot ulcer in 2012. Mean age was 63(±14) years and 67.8% were male. Co-morbidities included 85% had diabetes, 49.7% hypertension, 39.2% dyslipidaemia, 25.6% cardiovascular disease, 13.7% kidney disease and 12.2% smoking. Foot ulcer types included 51.6% neuropathic, 17.8% neuro-ischaemic, 7.2% ischaemic, 6.6% post-surgical and 16.8% other; whilst 31% were infected. Clinical indicator results revealed 98% had their wound categorised, 51% received non-removable offloading, median ulcer healing time was 6-weeks and 37% had ulcer recurrence. Conclusion This paper details the largest foot ulcer database reported in Australia. People presenting with foot ulcers appear predominantly older, male with several co-morbidities. Encouragingly it appears most patients are receiving best practice care. These results may be a factor in the significant reduction of Queensland diabetes foot-related hospitalisations and amputations recently reported.