Key result
AKI shows potential as a clinical quality indicator following PCI and major surgery.
Why the study?
Can acute kidney injury be considered a clinical quality measure?
While AKI has characteristics making it a potential target for quality indicator development, further research is needed to clarify its role across clinical settings.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AKI should not yet change practice as a quality indicator; leaves open its role pending targeted validation studies.
Quality indicators are measurements of healthcare outcome, process, or structure that can be used as tools to measure the quality of care and identify opportunities for improvement. Acute kidney injury (AKI) has many characteristics that make it a potential target for quality indicator development. It is common, associated with a high risk of adverse outcomes, and there are reports of gaps in the quality of care in several clinical settings despite publication of evidence-based guidelines. Substantial work has already been undertaken to develop quality measures related to AKI following percutaneous coronary interventions and major surgical procedures. This paper reviews the current literature that has addressed issues of prevention or management of AKI as outcome, process, or structure quality indicators in these clinical settings. Several current controversies about the appropriateness of such indicators related to AKI are identified. Further research to strengthen the evidence-base supporting prevention and management initiatives for AKI across all relevant clinical settings is needed to clarify the role of AKI as a target for clinical quality indicators.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
James et al. (2015) conducted a review in Acute kidney injury. Acute kidney injury as a clinical quality measure was evaluated. Acute kidney injury has potential as a target for clinical quality indicators following percutaneous coronary interventions and major surgical procedures, though further research is needed.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: