Impact of Changes in Clinical Practice Guidelines on Assessment of Quality of Care

Background:Measures for pay-for-performance and public reporting programs may be based on clinical practice guidelines. The impact of guideline changes over time—and whether evolving clinical evidence can render measures based on prior guidelines misleading—is not known. Objective:To assess the impact of using different percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) guidelines when evaluating whether PCI was indicated. Research Design:PCIs from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's CathPCI registry performed in 2003–2004 were categorized into indication classes (Class I, IIa, IIb, III), using 2001 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines for PCI, the guidelines available at the time of the procedures. The same procedures were recategorized using 2005 guidelines, which reflect the best evidence available to clinicians at the time of PCI. Procedures unable to be categorized were labeled as “Not Certain.” Subjects:Patients undergoing PCI for stable or unstable angina in 394 hospitals. Measures:Number of procedures changing classification categories using 2001 versus 2005 guidelines. Results:A total of 345,779 PCIs were evaluated. Applying 2001 guidelines, 47.9% had Class I indications; 33.3% Class IIa; 5.9% Class IIb; 3.7% Class III; and 9.2% Not Certain. Applying 2005 guidelines to the same procedures, 25.1% had Class I indications; 57.5% Class IIa; 5.5% Class IIb; 3.7% Class III; and 8.3% Not Certain; 41.1% of procedures changed the classification overall. Conclusions:The changes in guidelines resulted in a marked shift in whether PCIs done in 2003–2004 were considered indicated. Guideline-based performance measures should be carefully evaluated before implementation to avoid incorrect assessments of quality of care.

[1]  The Immediate Impact of the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) Trial on the Management of Stable Angina , 2009, Clinical cardiology.

[2]  D. Slawson,et al.  Identifying and using good practice guidelines. , 2009, American family physician.

[3]  Impact of NICE guidance on rates of haemorrhage after tonsillectomy: an evaluation of guidance issued during an ongoing national tonsillectomy audit , 2008, Quality & Safety in Health Care.

[4]  A. Sibai,et al.  Coronary angiography in Lebanon: Use and overuse. , 2008, International journal of cardiology.

[5]  Woodruff English,et al.  Rewarding Provider Performance: Aligning Incentives in Medicare , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[6]  L. Wann,et al.  ACCF/ASE/ACEP/AHA/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR 2008 appropriateness criteria for stress echocardiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, American Society of Echocardiography, American College of Emergency Physicians, American Heart Association, , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  Institute of Medicine, Rewarding provider performance (aligning incentives in medicare), Washington, D.C., National Academies Press, 2007, 248 pp., ISBN‐13: 978‐0‐309‐10216‐2; ISBN‐10: 0‐309‐10216‐2 , 2008 .

[8]  T. Wigmore,et al.  Effect of the implementation of NICE guidelines for ultrasound guidance on the complication rates associated with central venous catheter placement in patients presenting for routine surgery in a tertiary referral centre. , 2007, British journal of anaesthesia.

[9]  Samin K. Sharma,et al.  Differences in utilization of drug-eluting stents by race and payer. , 2007, The American journal of cardiology.

[10]  K. Eagle,et al.  The association between guideline-based treatment instructions at the point of discharge and lower 1-year mortality in Medicare patients after acute myocardial infarction: the American College of Cardiology's Guidelines Applied in Practice (GAP) initiative in Michigan. , 2007, American heart journal.

[11]  Elizabeth Olmsted Teisberg,et al.  How physicians can change the future of health care. , 2007, JAMA.

[12]  M. Rosenthal,et al.  Pay-for-performance: will the latest payment trend improve care? , 2007, JAMA.

[13]  Anne Frølich,et al.  A behavioral model of clinician responses to incentives to improve quality. , 2007, Health policy.

[14]  Bernhard Meier,et al.  Percutaneous coronary interventions in Europe: prevalence, numerical estimates, and projections based on data up to 2004. , 2007, Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society.

[15]  Manesh R. Patel,et al.  ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic Directions Committee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group. , 2006, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[16]  Elizabeth R DeLong,et al.  Association between hospital process performance and outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndromes. , 2006, JAMA.

[17]  E. Hannan,et al.  Differences in per capita rates of revascularization and in choice of revascularization procedure for eleven states , 2006, BMC Health Services Research.

[18]  Lippincott Williams Wilkins,et al.  ACC/AHA/SCAI Practice Guidelines, February 21, 2006 , 2006 .

[19]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  ACC/AHA clinical performance measures for adults with ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures (Writing Committee to Develop Performance Measures on ST-Elevation and Non-ST-El , 2006, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[20]  Joseph P Ornato,et al.  ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention--summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI Writing Committee to update the 2001 Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2006, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[21]  H. Krumholz,et al.  ACC/AHA clinical performance measures for adults with ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Commentary , 2006 .

[22]  Joseph P Ornato,et al.  ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI Writing Committee to Update the 2001 Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention). , 2006, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[23]  F. Verheugt,et al.  ESC guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. , 2005, European heart journal.

[24]  Sidney C. Smith,et al.  Relationship Between Procedure Indications and Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions by American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force Guidelines , 2005, Circulation.

[25]  Robert Parrish,et al.  Guideline-based standardized care is associated with substantially lower mortality in medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction: the American College of Cardiology's Guidelines Applied in Practice (GAP) Projects in Michigan. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[26]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  ACC/AHA Clinical Performance Measures for Adults with Chronic Heart Failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures (Writing Committee to Develop Heart Failure Clinical Performance Measures): endorsed by the Heart Failure Society , 2005, Circulation.

[27]  Antonio Colombo,et al.  Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. The Task Force for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology. , 2005, European heart journal.

[28]  Martin Roland,et al.  Linking physicians' pay to the quality of care--a major experiment in the United kingdom. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  G. Lamas,et al.  ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction--executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to revise the 1999 guidelines for the management of patients wi , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[30]  B. Gersh,et al.  The medicine, angioplasty, or surgery study (MASS-II): a randomized, controlled clinical trial of three therapeutic strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease: one-year results. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[31]  T Philip,et al.  International assessment of the quality of clinical practice guidelines in oncology using the Appraisal of Guidelines and Research and Evaluation Instrument. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[32]  S. Pocock,et al.  Seven-year outcome in the RITA-2 trial: coronary angioplasty versus medical therapy. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[33]  L. Leape,et al.  Adherence to practice guidelines: the role of specialty society guidelines. , 2003, American heart journal.

[34]  G. Feder,et al.  Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: the AGREE project , 2003, Quality & safety in health care.

[35]  F. Cluzeau,et al.  Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: the AGREE project , 2003 .

[36]  K. Fox,et al.  Interventional versus conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial , 2002, The Lancet.

[37]  William S Weintraub,et al.  A contemporary overview of percutaneous coronary interventions. The American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry (ACC-NCDR). , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[38]  William S Weintraub,et al.  Development of a risk adjustment mortality model using the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry (ACC-NCDR) experience: 1998-2000. , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[39]  C. Vassanelli,et al.  [Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban]. , 2001, Italian heart journal. Supplement : official journal of the Italian Federation of Cardiology.

[40]  P. Shekelle,et al.  Validity of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality clinical practice guidelines: how quickly do guidelines become outdated? , 2001, JAMA.

[41]  G. Browman,et al.  Development and aftercare of clinical guidelines: the balance between rigor and pragmatism. , 2001, JAMA.

[42]  L. Leape,et al.  Racial Differences in Cardiac Revascularization Rates: Does Overuse Explain Higher Rates among White Patients? , 2001, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[43]  Jeremy M Grimshaw,et al.  When should clinical guidelines be updated? , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[44]  K A Eagle,et al.  ACC/AHA guidelines of percutaneous coronary interventions (revision of the 1993 PTCA guidelines)--executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (committee to revise the 1993 guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coro , 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[45]  J. Kahan,et al.  European criteria for the appropriateness and necessity of coronary revascularization procedures. , 2000, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[46]  Alessandro Liberati,et al.  Practice guidelines developed by specialty societies: the need for a critical appraisal , 2000, The Lancet.

[47]  C. Fox,et al.  Using a Clinical Practice Guideline to Measure Physician Practice: Translating a Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure , 1997, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[48]  Challenges in Measuring Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines , 1997, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[49]  D. Baker,et al.  Phase II of the AHCPR-sponsored heart failure guideline: translating practice recommendations into review criteria. , 1996, The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement.

[50]  R. Baker,et al.  Fortnightly Review: Development of review criteria: linking guidelines and assessment of quality , 1995, BMJ.

[51]  How Many More Studies Will It Take ? , 2022 .