To review and update the conceptual framework, indicator content and research priorities of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD) Health Care Quality Indicators (HCQI) project, after a decade of collaborative work. A structured assessment was carried out using a modified Delphi approach, followed by a consensus meeting, to assess the suite of HCQI for international comparisons, agree on revisions to the original framework and set priorities for research and development. International group of countries participating to OECD projects. Members of the OECD HCQI expert group. A reference matrix, based on a revised performance framework, was used to map and assess all seventy HCQI routinely calculated by the OECD expert group. A total of 21 indicators were agreed to be excluded, due to the following concerns: (i) relevance, (ii) international comparability, particularly where heterogeneous coding practices might induce bias, (iii) feasibility, when the number of countries able to report was limited and the added value did not justify sustained effort and (iv) actionability, for indicators that were unlikely to improve on the basis of targeted policy interventions. The revised OECD framework for HCQI represents a new milestone of a long-standing international collaboration among a group of countries committed to building common ground for performance measurement. The expert group believes that the continuation of this work is paramount to provide decision makers with a validated toolbox to directly act on quality improvement strategies.

Background: This study aimed to analyze the effect of cardiac rehabilitation programs on the health-related quality of life of patients after a coronary cardiac event using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for up to 6 months of evaluation. Methods: A comprehensive search was carried out in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases for randomized controlled trials comparing the cardiac rehabilitation program with usual care. Two independent reviewers assessed the studies for inclusion, risk of bias using the Cochrane tool, and quality of evidence through the GRADE system. A meta-analysis was performed on studies assessing health-related quality of life with the SF-12 (Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary) up to 6 months after the program. Results: Twelve studies encompassed 2260 patients who participated in a cardiac rehabilitation program after a coronary event, with a mean age of 60.06 years. The generic PROMs used to assess quality of life were the SF-12, SF-36, EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and GHQ, and the specific coronary heart disease PROMs were MacNew and HeartQoL. There was a positive effect of participation in cardiac rehabilitation on the physical component of health-related quality of life at 6 months (MD [7.02]; p = 0.04] and on the mental component (MD [1.06]; p = 0.82) after applying the SF-12. Conclusions: This study highlights the significant benefits of cardiac rehabilitation programs on health-related quality of life, particularly in the physical domain at 6 months. Assessing outcomes over time through PROMs after coronary heart events is essential, thus making it possible to personalize patients’ care and improve their health status.

Proximal femur fracture (PFF) is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. The European Quality of Care Pathway (EQCP) study on PFF (NCT00962910) was designed to determine how care pathways (CP) for hospital treatment of PFF affect consistency of care, adherence to evidence-based key interventions, and clinical outcome. An international cluster-randomized controlled trial (cRCT) will be performed in Belgium, Ireland, Italy and Portugal. Based on power analyses, a sample of 44 hospital teams and 437 patients per arm will be included in the study. In the control arm, usual care will be provided. Experimental teams will implement a care pathway which will include three active components: a formative evaluation of quality and organization of the care setting, a set of evidence-based key interventions, and support of the development and implementation of the CP. Main outcome will be the six-month mortality rate. The EQCP study constitutes the first international cRCT on care pathways. The EQCP project was designed as both a research and a quality improvement project and will provide a real-world framework for process evaluation to improve our understanding of why and when CP can really work. NCT00962910

Adherence to guidelines for patients with proximal femur fracture is suboptimal. To evaluate the effect of a care pathway for the in-hospital management of older geriatric hip fracture patients on adherence to guidelines and patient outcomes. The European Quality of Care Pathways study is a cluster randomized controlled trial. 26 hospitals in Belgium, Italy and Portugal. Older adults with a proximal femur fracture (n = 514 patients) were included. Hospitals treating older adults (>65) with a proximal femur fracture were randomly assigned to an intervention group, i.e. implementation of a care pathway, or control group, i.e. usual care. Thirteen patient outcomes and 24 process indicators regarding in-hospital management, as well as three not-recommended care activities were measured. Adjusted and unadjusted regression analyses were conducted using intention-to-treat procedures. In the intervention group 301 patients in 15 hospitals were included, and in the control group 213 patients in 11 hospitals. Sixty-five percent of the patients were older than 80 years. The implementation of this care pathway had no significant impact on the thirteen patient outcomes. The preoperative management improved significantly. Eighteen of 24 process indicators improved, but only two improved significantly. Only for a few teams a geriatrician was an integral member of the treatment team. Implementation of a care pathway improved compliance to evidence, but no significant effect on patient outcomes was found. The impact of the collaboration between surgeons and geriatricians on adherence to guidelines and patient outcomes should be studied. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00962910.