Does public reporting improve the quality of hospital care for acute myocardial infarction? Results from a regional outcome evaluation program in Italy.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether public reporting of performance data was associated with a change over time in quality indicators for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in Italian hospitals. DESIGN Pre-post evaluation of AMI indicators in the Lazio region, before and after disclosure of the Regional Outcome Evaluation Program, and a comparative evaluation versus other Italian regions not participating in the program. SETTING/DATA SOURCES Nationwide Hospital Information System and vital status records. PARTICIPANTS 24 800 patients treated for AMI in Lazio and 39 350 in the other regions. INTERVENTION Public reporting of the Regional Outcome Evaluation Program in the Lazio region. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Risk-adjusted indicators for AMI. RESULTS The proportion of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients treated with percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) within 48 h in Lazio changed from 31.3 to 48.7%, before and after public reporting, respectively (relative increase 56%; P < 0.001). In the other regions, the proportion increased from 51.5 to 58.4% (relative increase 13%; P < 0.001). Overall 30-day mortality and 30-day mortality for patients treated with PCI did not improve during the study period. The 30-day mortality for STEMI patients not treated with PCI in Lazio was significantly higher in 2009 (29.0%) versus 2006/07 (24.0%) (P = .002). CONCLUSIONS Public reporting may have contributed to increasing the proportion of STEMI patients treated with timely PCI. The mortality outcomes should be interpreted with caution. Changes in AMI diagnostic and coding systems should also be considered. Risk-adjusted quality indicators represent a fundamental instrument for monitoring and potentially enhancing quality of care.

[1]  R. Gnavi,et al.  Care of acute myocardial infarction in the coronary care units of Piedmont in 2007: results from the ‘PRIMA_sweet’ region-wide survey , 2013, Journal of cardiovascular medicine.

[2]  Marina Davoli,et al.  Reporting of quality indicators and improvement in hospital performance: the P.Re.Val.E. Regional Outcome Evaluation Program. , 2012, Health services research.

[3]  D. Atar,et al.  ESC Guidelines for the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients Presenting With ST-Segment Elevation , 2013 .

[4]  S. Giampaoli,et al.  Clinical epidemiology, management and outcome of acute coronary syndromes in the Italian network on acute coronary syndromes (IN-ACS Outcome study) , 2012, Acute cardiac care.

[5]  Massimo Stafoggia,et al.  P.Re.Val.E.: outcome research program for the evaluation of health care quality in Lazio, Italy , 2012, BMC Health Services Research.

[6]  Milena Vainieri,et al.  What drives hospital performance? The impact of comparative outcome evaluation of patients admitted for hip fracture in two Italian regions , 2011, BMJ quality & safety.

[7]  C. Held,et al.  Association between adoption of evidence-based treatment and survival for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. , 2011, JAMA.

[8]  S. de Servi,et al.  LombardIMA: a regional registry for coronary angioplasty in ST-elevation myocardial infarction , 2011, Journal of cardiovascular medicine.

[9]  D. Balzi,et al.  Hospital discharge data for assessing myocardial infarction events and trends, and effects of diagnosis validation according to MONICA and AHA criteria , 2010, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[10]  P. Verdecchia,et al.  [Management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the Umbria region: results from the observational prospective Umbria-STEMI registry]. , 2010, Giornale italiano di cardiologia.

[11]  P. Pronovost,et al.  Using hospital mortality rates to judge hospital performance: a bad idea that just won’t go away , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  H. Mooney.  Marmot says government can’t afford to ignore health inequality , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  B. Gersh.  Declining Severity of Myocardial Infarction From 1987 to 2002: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study , 2010 .

[14]  Peter C Austin,et al.  Effectiveness of public report cards for improving the quality of cardiac care: the EFFECT study: a randomized trial. , 2009, JAMA.

[15]  J. Ornato,et al.  2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST‐Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) , 2009, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[16]  N. Danchin.  Systems of care for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: impact of different models on clinical outcomes. , 2009, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[17]  H. Krumholz,et al.  All-cause readmission and repeat revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention in a cohort of medicare patients. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[18]  E. Stuart,et al.  Impact of public reporting on quality of postacute care. , 2009, Health services research.

[19]  M. Movahed,et al.  Rate of acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the United States from 1988 to 2004 (from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample). , 2009, The American journal of cardiology.

[20]  F. Welt,et al.  The public health hazards of risk avoidance associated with public reporting of risk-adjusted outcomes in coronary intervention. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[21]  J. Ornato,et al.  Trends in presenting characteristics and hospital mortality among patients with ST elevation and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction from 1990 to 2006. , 2008, American heart journal.

[22]  Michael Weis,et al.  Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with persistent ST-segment elevation: the Task Force on the Management of ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology. , 2008, European heart journal.

[23]  J. Tu,et al.  Indicators of quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction , 2008, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[24]  L. Bisanti,et al.  The association of socioeconomic disadvantage with postoperative complications after major elective cardiovascular surgery , 2008, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[25]  A. Branzi,et al.  Optimisation of therapeutic strategies for ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction: the impact of a territorial network on reperfusion therapy and mortality , 2008, Heart.

[26]  D. Berwick,et al.  The triple aim: care, health, and cost. , 2008, Health affairs.

[27]  K. Eagle,et al.  Trends in acute reperfusion therapy for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction from 1999 to 2006: we are getting better but we have got a long way to go. , 2008, European heart journal.

[28]  M. Radford,et al.  Impact of the New York State Cardiac Surgery and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Reporting System on the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. , 2008, American heart journal.

[29]  P. Shekelle,et al.  Systematic Review: The Evidence That Publishing Patient Care Performance Data Improves Quality of Care , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[30]  Assessing clinical performance in cardiac surgery. Does a specialised clinical database make a difference? , 2006, Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery.

[31]  Eva Kline-Rogers,et al.  Public reporting and case selection for percutaneous coronary interventions: an analysis from two large multicenter percutaneous coronary intervention databases. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[32]  P. Romano,et al.  Impact of reporting hospital performance , 2005, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[33]  Martin Marshall,et al.  Impact of star performance ratings in English acute hospital trusts , 2005, Journal of health services research & policy.

[34]  A. Jha,et al.  Effect of the transformation of the Veterans Affairs Health Care System on the quality of care. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[35]  J. Boura,et al.  Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction : a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials , 2022 .

[36]  E. Falk,et al.  Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. The Task Force on the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology. , 2003, European heart journal.

[37]  David W Baker,et al.  Mortality Trends During a Program That Publicly Reported Hospital Performance , 2002, Medical care.

[38]  M. Chassin,et al.  Achieving and sustaining improved quality: lessons from New York State and cardiac surgery. , 2002, Health affairs.

[39]  R. Sega,et al.  Surveillance of ischaemic heart disease: results from the Italian MONICA populations. , 2001, International journal of epidemiology.

[40]  H. Davies,et al.  Public release of performance data and quality improvement: internal responses to external data by US health care providers , 2001, Quality in health care : QHC.

[41]  E L Hannan,et al.  New York State's Cardiac Surgery Reporting System: four years later. , 1994, The Annals of thoracic surgery.