Why the study?
The quality of care provided to patients with atrial fibrillation in tertiary and non-tertiary hospitals in China remained obscure.
Does the quality of care and compliance with performance measures for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation differ between tertiary and non-tertiary hospitals over time?
Observational (n=13,439)
Yes
Does the quality of care and compliance with performance measures for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation differ between tertiary and non-tertiary hospitals over time?
Compliance with oral anticoagulation and INR monitoring for nonvalvular AF improved over time in Beijing hospitals, though overall adherence to quality measures remains suboptimal.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Suboptimal anticoagulation adherence persists in nonvalvular AF despite temporal gains; leaves open whether hospital-targeted interventions close remaining gaps.
BACKGROUND: The quality of care presented to AF cases in tertiary and non-tertiary hospitals in China remains obscure and needs further investigation. Therefore, we examined the compliance with quality measures (QMs) and clinical performance measures (PMs) that were proposed by the ACC/AHA in 2016 in a Chinese adult population with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). We also investigated the changes in patients' characteristics, treatment plans, and quality of provided care at different time-points [2011-2016]. METHODS: We used the datasets from two registry-based studies in Beijing, including the Chinese Atrial Fibrillation Registry (CHINA-AF) investigation. From August 2011 to July 2016, an overall number of 13,439 nonvalvular AF cases were included. Our primary outcome was to determine the compliance rate with two PMs [oral anticoagulant (OAC) use and prothrombin time international normalized ratio (INR)] and six QMs (beta-blocker, ACEI-ARB, and the inappropriate prescription of antiarrhythmic drugs, Sotalol, antiplatelet and OAC, and non-dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist) over a period of 5 years [2011-2016]. Also, the difference in compliance between tertiary and non-tertiary hospitals was investigated. RESULTS: The compliance with PMs and QMs was variable between tertiary and non-tertiary hospitals. In tertiary hospitals, the total number of inpatient beds was >500, and each bed was equipped with >1.03 health technical personnel and >0.4 nurses. In non-tertiary hospitals, the available beds capacity was <500, and each bed corresponded with 0.7-0.88 health technical personnel and >0.4 nurses. The compliance rates with OAC use steadily increased from 2011-2015 in tertiary hospitals (35%, 35.9%, 37.9%, 45%, and 49%, P<0.001). In non-tertiary hospitals, INR follow-up of warfarin use increased significantly over the years, with rates of 36.2%, 60.5%, 71.6%, 64.3%, and 81.5% (P=0.04), respectively. In terms of QMs, the compliance with the six measure sets was quite similar among tertiary and non-tertiary hospitals avoiding any significant difference over the years (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We noted an improvement in medical quality regarding the use of OAC, especially in tertiary hospitals. Meanwhile, the compliance rates of INR follow-up improved in non-tertiary hospitals. However, the compliance rates of other performance and QMs are still low, which are in need of improvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yu et al. (2021) conducted an observational in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (n=13,439). Care in tertiary hospitals vs. Care in non-tertiary hospitals was evaluated on Compliance rate with two performance measures (OAC use and INR) and six quality measures.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: