Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

Background: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. Methods: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. Findings: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96–1·28). Interpretation: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. METHODS: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. FINDINGS: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96-1·28). INTERPRETATION: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

The Study of Treatment for Renal Insufficiency: Data and Evaluation (STRIDE), a National Registry of Chronic Kidney Disease

Optimization of care in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) could be the key to improved clinical and economic outcomes, both during the phase of CKD as well as in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). CKD is a major public health problem that has been insufficiently studied. There is little published information on outcomes among CKD patients, specifically, data on mortality, morbidity, and quality of life. Indeed, recent efforts by the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) have served to define the classification, evaluation, and approach to management of CKD in practice. The Study of Treatment for Renal Insufficiency: Data and Evaluation (STRIDE) registry is an initiative to study CKD patients in nephrology practices across the country. It is a prospective observational study whose objective is to profile demographic and clinical variables, practice patterns, comorbid conditions, quality of life, and outcomes in a nationally based sample of CKD patients. This article details the design, methodology, and process of enrollment into the registry.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73215/1/j.1525-139X.2002.00088.x.pd

The Longitudinal Chronic Kidney Disease Study: A Prospective Cohort Study of Predialysis Renal Failure

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a significant public health problem: every year the number of Americans living with CKD and requiring renal replacement therapy increases. In addition, individuals with CKD have substantially increased morbidity and mortality compared to the general population. The Longitudinal Chronic Kidney Dialysis (LCKD) Study is a multicenter, prospective, observational study of patients with moderate to severe CKD that was designed to better describe the course of the disease and the determinants of patient outcomes. Patients with moderate to severe CKD (glomerular filtration rate [GFR] < 60 ml/min/m 2 ) from four academic nephrology clinics were enrolled between 2000 and 2002. Special cardiac and vascular testing has recently commenced as phase II of this study. Areas that have been or are currently being studied include anemia management, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), medication use, and markers of cardiovascular disease. This article describes the LCKD Study in the context of current knowledge of CKD.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/74093/1/j.1525-139X.2003.16093.x.pd

Discussion

4 page(s