Why the study?
Cardiovascular registries have grown rapidly and play a crucial role in providing real-world data and measuring quality metrics, but ongoing challenges and inherent observational limitations remain.
Design
Review
Registries support quality improvement and real-world evidence; leaves open optimal methods to mitigate selection bias in observational analyses.
Cardiovascular registries play an integral role in providing real-world data on a number of cardiovascular conditions and allowing measurement of quality metrics across a large cohort of patients. Over the past 35 years, the number of cardiovascular registries has skyrocketed, and their use will only continue to grow as data on novel procedures and devices will need to be collected and analyzed. The American College of Cardiology and Society of Thoracic Surgeons Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry is just one example of a modern registry that plays a crucial role in collecting data on patients undergoing transcatheter valvular procedures. Through public reporting registries, data can be shared on a hospital and provider level for many quality performance measures. There remains much work to be done on allowing automated data extraction from the electronic medical record directly into registries. No matter how sophisticated and complete a registry is, it can never overcome the problem of treatment selection bias that is inherent in observational data. This review discusses the growth, benefits, and limitations of national registries and their role in developing evidence for best clinical practice, measuring outcomes, providing feedback to clinicians, and improving quality of care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Meltzer et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: