Improving Quality of Care in Cardiac Surgery: Evaluating Risk Factors, Processes of Care, Structures of Care, and Outcomes

The 1985 release of hospital report cards by the Health Care Financing Administration awakened the public's awareness of variations in outcomes following patient treatment. In 1972, the Department of Veterans Affairs initiated an oversight process for all VA-based cardiac surgery programs. In response to Public Law 99-166, the Continuous Improvement in Cardiac Surgery Program (CICSP) national database was developed in 1987. This CICSP effort reported variations in outcomes across VA cardiac programs. In 1997, the CICSP expanded (CICSP-X) to identify the interrelationships of risk factors with processes and structures of care, as well as clinical outcomes. Based on VA findings to date, these quality improvement endeavors appear to have positively affected short-term and longer-term cardiac surgical outcomes. To advance a new patient-focused paradigm for continuous improvement in cardiac surgical care quality for all US citizens, an integrated data-driven reporting approach with broad-based participation should be implemented to optimally improve patient care.

[1]  J. Mainz.  Defining and classifying clinical indicators for quality improvement. , 2003, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[2]  A Donabedian,et al.  Quality, Cost, and Health: An Integrative Model , 1982, Medical care.

[3]  F. Grover,et al.  Initial report of the Veterans Administration Preoperative Risk Assessment Study for Cardiac Surgery. , 1990, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[4]  J. Habbema,et al.  Internal validation of predictive models: efficiency of some procedures for logistic regression analysis. , 2001, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[5]  E. Hannan,et al.  Provider Profiling and Quality Improvement Efforts in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: The Effect on Short-Term Mortality Among Medicare Beneficiaries , 2003, Medical care.

[6]  Bradley G Hammill,et al.  A decade of change--risk profiles and outcomes for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting procedures, 1990-1999: a report from the STS National Database Committee and the Duke Clinical Research Institute. Society of Thoracic Surgeons. , 2002, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[7]  P. Peduzzi,et al.  Quality control for cardiac surgery in the Veterans Administration. , 1986, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[8]  P. Austin,et al.  Cardiac report cards: how can they be made better? , 2007, Circulation.

[9]  J. Corrigan,et al.  COMMITTEE ON IDENTIFYING PRIORITY AREAS FOR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT , 2003 .

[10]  A Donabedian,et al.  Criteria and standards for quality assessment and monitoring. , 1986, QRB. Quality review bulletin.

[11]  E. Hannan,et al.  The decline in coronary artery bypass graft surgery mortality in New York State. The role of surgeon volume. , 1995, JAMA.

[12]  Thomas E. Moritz,et al.  The Processes, Structures, and Outcomes of Care in Cardiac Surgery Study Protocol , 1995, Medical care.

[13]  D. Malenka,et al.  The Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group: a regional collaborative effort for continuous quality improvement in cardiovascular disease. , 1998, The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement.

[14]  David J. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Surgical audit: statistical lessons from Nightingale and Codman , 1999 .

[15]  A L Shroyer,et al.  A Decade’s Experience With Quality Improvement in Cardiac Surgery Using the Veterans Affairs and Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Databases , 2001, Annals of surgery.