QualDash: Adaptable Generation of Visualisation Dashboards for Healthcare Quality Improvement

YesAdapting dashboard design to different contexts of use is an open question in visualisation research. Dashboard designers often seek to strike a balance between dashboard adaptability and ease-of-use, and in hospitals challenges arise from the vast diversity of key metrics, data models and users involved at different organizational levels. In this design study, we present QualDash, a dashboard generation engine that allows for the dynamic configuration and deployment of visualisation dashboards for healthcare quality improvement (QI). We present a rigorous task analysis based on interviews with healthcare professionals, a co-design workshop and a series of one-on-one meetings with front line analysts. From these activities we define a metric card metaphor as a unit of visual analysis in healthcare QI, using this concept as a building block for generating highly adaptable dashboards, and leading to the design of a Metric Specification Structure (MSS). Each MSS is a JSON structure which enables dashboard authors to concisely configure unit-specific variants of a metric card, while offloading common patterns that are shared across cards to be preset by the engine. We reflect on deploying and iterating the design of QualDash in cardiology wards and pediatric intensive care units of five NHS hospitals. Finally, we report evaluation results that demonstrate the adaptability, ease-of-use and usefulness of QualDash in a real-world scenario

Advanced brain dopamine transporter imaging in mice using small-animal SPECT/CT

Abstract. The stable marriage problem has recently been studied in its general setting, where both ties and incomplete lists are allowed. It is NP-hard to find a stable matching of maximum size, while any stable matching is a maximal matching and thus trivially a factor two approximation. In this paper, we give the first nontrivial result for approximation of factor less than two. Our algorithm achieves an approximation ratio of 2/(1+L −2) for instances in which only men have ties of length at most L. When both men and women are allowed to have ties, we show a ratio of 13/7(< 1.858) for the case when ties are of length two. We also improve the lower bound on the approximation ratio to 2

Health outcomes after myocardial infarction: A population study of 56 million people in England

Background The occurrence of a range of health outcomes following myocardial infarction (MI) is unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the long-term risk of major health outcomes following MI and generate sociodemographic stratified risk charts in order to inform care recommendations in the post-MI period and underpin shared decision making. Methods and findings This nationwide cohort study includes all individuals aged ≥18 years admitted to one of 229 National Health Service (NHS) Trusts in England between 1 January 2008 and 31 January 2017 (final follow-up 27 March 2017). We analysed 11 non-fatal health outcomes (subsequent MI and first hospitalisation for heart failure, atrial fibrillation, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease, severe bleeding, renal failure, diabetes mellitus, dementia, depression, and cancer) and all-cause mortality. Of the 55,619,430 population of England, 34,116,257 individuals contributing to 145,912,852 hospitalisations were included (mean age 41.7 years (standard deviation [SD 26.1]); n = 14,747,198 (44.2%) male). There were 433,361 individuals with MI (mean age 67.4 years [SD 14.4)]; n = 283,742 (65.5%) male). Following MI, all-cause mortality was the most frequent event (adjusted cumulative incidence at 9 years 37.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] [37.6,37.9]), followed by heart failure (29.6%; 95% CI [29.4,29.7]), renal failure (27.2%; 95% CI [27.0,27.4]), atrial fibrillation (22.3%; 95% CI [22.2,22.5]), severe bleeding (19.0%; 95% CI [18.8,19.1]), diabetes (17.0%; 95% CI [16.9,17.1]), cancer (13.5%; 95% CI [13.3,13.6]), cerebrovascular disease (12.5%; 95% CI [12.4,12.7]), depression (8.9%; 95% CI [8.7,9.0]), dementia (7.8%; 95% CI [7.7,7.9]), subsequent MI (7.1%; 95% CI [7.0,7.2]), and peripheral arterial disease (6.5%; 95% CI [6.4,6.6]). Compared with a risk-set matched population of 2,001,310 individuals, first hospitalisation of all non-fatal health outcomes were increased after MI, except for dementia (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.01; 95% CI [0.99,1.02];p = 0.468) and cancer (aHR 0.56; 95% CI [0.56,0.57];p < 0.001). The study includes data from secondary care only—as such diagnoses made outside of secondary care may have been missed leading to the potential underestimation of the total burden of disease following MI. Conclusions In this study, up to a third of patients with MI developed heart failure or renal failure, 7% had another MI, and 38% died within 9 years (compared with 35% deaths among matched individuals). The incidence of all health outcomes, except dementia and cancer, was higher than expected during the normal life course without MI following adjustment for age, sex, year, and socioeconomic deprivation. Efforts targeted to prevent or limit the accrual of chronic, multisystem disease states following MI are needed and should be guided by the demographic-specific risk charts derived in this study

Prognosis, characteristics, and provision of care for patients with the unspecified heart failure electronic health record phenotype: a population-based linked cohort study of 95262 individuals

Background Whether the accuracy of the phenotype ascribed to patients in electronic health records (EHRs) is associated with variation in prognosis and care provision is unknown. We investigated this for heart failure (HF, characterised as HF with preserved ejection fraction [HFpEF], HF with reduced ejection fraction [HFrEF] and unspecified HF). Methods We included individuals aged 16 years and older with a new diagnosis of HF between January 2, 1998 and February 28, 2022 from linked primary and secondary care records in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink in England. We investigated the provision of guideline-recommended diagnostic investigations and pharmacological treatments. The primary outcome was a composite of HF hospitalisation or all-cause death, and secondary outcomes were time to HF hospitalisation, all-cause death and death from cardiovascular causes. We used Kaplan–Meier curves and log rank tests to compare survival across HF phenotypes and adjusted for potential confounders in Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. Findings Of a cohort of 95,262 individuals, 1271 (1.3%) were recorded as having HFpEF, 10,793 (11.3%) as HFrEF and 83,198 (87.3%) as unspecified HF. Individuals recorded as unspecified HF were older with a higher prevalence of dementia. Unspecified HF, compared to patients with a recorded HF phenotype, were less likely to receive specialist assessment, echocardiography or natriuretic peptide testing in the peri-diagnostic period, or receive angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta blockers or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists up to 12 months after diagnosis (risk ratios compared to HFrEF, 0.64, 95% CI 0.63–0.64; 0.59, 0.58–0.60; 0.57, 0.55–0.59; respectively) and had significantly worse outcomes (adjusted hazard ratios compared to HFrEF, HF hospitalisation and death 1.66, 95% CI 1.59–1.74; all-cause mortality 2.00, 1.90–2.10; cardiovascular death 1.77, 1.65–1.90). Interpretation Our findings suggested that absence of specification of HF phenotype in routine EHRs is inversely associated with clinical investigations, treatments and survival, representing an actionable target to mitigate prognostic and health resource burden

Improving the Safety and Continuity Of Medicines management at Transitions of care (ISCOMAT): protocol for a process evaluation of a cluster randomised control trial

Introduction A key priority for the UK National Health Service and patients is to ensure that medicines are used safely and effectively. However, medication changes are not always optimally communicated and implemented when patients transfer from hospital into community settings. Heart failure is a common reason for admission to hospital. Patients with heart failure have a high burden of morbidity, mortality and complex pharmacotherapeutic regimens. The Improving the Safety and Continuity Of Medicines management at Transitions of care programme comprises a cluster randomised controlled trial which will test the effectiveness of a complex behavioural intervention aimed at improving medications management at the interface between hospitals discharge and community care. We will conduct a rigorous process evaluation to inform interpretation of the trial findings, inform implementation of the intervention on a wider scale and aid dissemination of the intervention. Methods and analysis The process evaluation will be conducted in six purposively selected intervention sites (ie, hospital trusts and associated community pharmacies) using a mixed-methods design. Fidelity and barriers/enablers of implementation of the Medicines at Transitions Intervention (MaTI) will be explored using observation, interviews (20 patients, 40 healthcare professionals), surveys and routine trial data collection on adherence to MaTI. A parallel mixed analysis will be applied. Qualitative data will be thematically analysed using Framework analysis and survey data will be analysed descriptively. Data will be synthesised, triangulated and mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research where appropriate. The process evaluation commenced on June 2018 and is due to end on February 2021. Ethics and dissemination Approved by Research Ethics Committee and the UK Health Research Authority REC: 18/YH/0017/IRAS: 231 431. Findings will be disseminated via academic and policy conferences, peer-reviewed publications and social media

Analysis of a Web-Based Dashboard to Support the Use of National Audit Data in Quality Improvement: Realist Evaluation

YesDashboards can support data-driven quality improvements in health care. They visualize data in ways intended to ease cognitive load and support data comprehension, but how they are best integrated into working practices needs further investigation. This paper reports the findings of a realist evaluation of a web-based quality dashboard (QualDash) developed to support the use of national audit data in quality improvement. QualDash was co-designed with data users and installed in 8 clinical services (3 pediatric intensive care units and 5 cardiology services) across 5 health care organizations (sites A-E) in England between July and December 2019. Champions were identified to support adoption. Data to evaluate QualDash were collected between July 2019 and August 2021 and consisted of 148.5 hours of observations including hospital wards and clinical governance meetings, log files that captured the extent of use of QualDash over 12 months, and a questionnaire designed to assess the dashboard's perceived usefulness and ease of use. Guided by the principles of realist evaluation, data were analyzed to understand how, why, and in what circumstances QualDash supported the use of national audit data in quality improvement. The observations revealed that variation across sites in the amount and type of resources available to support data use, alongside staff interactions with QualDash, shaped its use and impact. Sites resourced with skilled audit support staff and established reporting systems (sites A and C) continued to use existing processes to report data. A number of constraints influenced use of QualDash in these sites including that some dashboard metrics were not configured in line with user expectations and staff were not fully aware how QualDash could be used to facilitate their work. In less well-resourced services, QualDash automated parts of their reporting process, streamlining the work of audit support staff (site B), and, in some cases, highlighted issues with data completeness that the service worked to address (site E). Questionnaire responses received from 23 participants indicated that QualDash was perceived as useful and easy to use despite its variable use in practice. Web-based dashboards have the potential to support data-driven improvement, providing access to visualizations that can help users address key questions about care quality. Findings from this study point to ways in which dashboard design might be improved to optimize use and impact in different contexts; this includes using data meaningful to stakeholders in the co-design process and actively engaging staff knowledgeable about current data use and routines in the scrutiny of the dashboard metrics and functions. In addition, consideration should be given to the processes of data collection and upload that underpin the quality of the data visualized and consequently its potential to stimulate quality improvement.This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Program (project #16/04/06)

Design and evaluation of an interactive quality dashboard for national clinical audit data: a realist evaluation

YesBackground: National audits aim to reduce variations in quality by stimulating quality improvement. However, varying provider engagement with audit data means that this is not being realised. Aim: The aim of the study was to develop and evaluate a quality dashboard (i.e. QualDash) to support clinical teams’ and managers’ use of national audit data. Design: The study was a realist evaluation and biography of artefacts study. Setting: The study involved five NHS acute trusts. Methods and results: In phase 1, we developed a theory of national audits through interviews. Data use was supported by data access, audit staff skilled to produce data visualisations, data timeliness and quality, and the importance of perceived metrics. Data were mainly used by clinical teams. Organisational-level staff questioned the legitimacy of national audits. In phase 2, QualDash was co-designed and the QualDash theory was developed. QualDash provides interactive customisable visualisations to enable the exploration of relationships between variables. Locating QualDash on site servers gave users control of data upload frequency. In phase 3, we developed an adoption strategy through focus groups. ‘Champions’, awareness-raising through e-bulletins and demonstrations, and quick reference tools were agreed. In phase 4, we tested the QualDash theory using a mixed-methods evaluation. Constraints on use were metric configurations that did not match users’ expectations, affecting champions’ willingness to promote QualDash, and limited computing resources. Easy customisability supported use. The greatest use was where data use was previously constrained. In these contexts, report preparation time was reduced and efforts to improve data quality were supported, although the interrupted time series analysis did not show improved data quality. Twenty-three questionnaires were returned, revealing positive perceptions of ease of use and usefulness. In phase 5, the feasibility of conducting a cluster randomised controlled trial of QualDash was assessed. Interviews were undertaken to understand how QualDash could be revised to support a region-wide Gold Command. Requirements included multiple real-time data sources and functionality to help to identify priorities. Conclusions: Audits seeking to widen engagement may find the following strategies beneficial: involving a range of professional groups in choosing metrics; real-time reporting; presenting ‘headline’ metrics important to organisational-level staff; using routinely collected clinical data to populate data fields; and dashboards that help staff to explore and report audit data. Those designing dashboards may find it beneficial to include the following: ‘at a glance’ visualisation of key metrics; visualisations configured in line with existing visualisations that teams use, with clear labelling; functionality that supports the creation of reports and presentations; the ability to explore relationships between variables and drill down to look at subgroups; and low requirements for computing resources. Organisations introducing a dashboard may find the following strategies beneficial: clinical champion to promote use; testing with real data by audit staff; establishing routines for integrating use into work practices; involving audit staff in adoption activities; and allowing customisation. Limitations: The COVID-19 pandemic stopped phase 4 data collection, limiting our ability to further test and refine the QualDash theory. Questionnaire results should be treated with caution because of the small, possibly biased, sample. Control sites for the interrupted time series analysis were not possible because of research and development delays. One intervention site did not submit data. Limited uptake meant that assessing the impact on more measures was not appropriate. Future work: The extent to which national audit dashboards are used and the strategies national audits use to encourage uptake, a realist review of the impact of dashboards, and rigorous evaluations of the impact of dashboards and the effectiveness of adoption strategies should be explored. Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN18289782.This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Impact of a Prior Cancer Diagnosis on Quality of Care and Survival Following Acute Myocardial Infarction: Retrospective Population-Based Cohort Study in England

BACKGROUND: An increasing proportion of patients with cancer experience acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We investigated differences in quality of AMI care and survival between patients with and without previous cancer diagnoses. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using Virtual Cardio-Oncology Research Initiative data. Patients aged 40+ years hospitalized in England with AMI between January 2010 and March 2018 were assessed, ascertaining previous cancers diagnosed within 15 years. Multivariable regression was used to assess effects of cancer diagnosis, time, stage, and site on international quality indicators and mortality. RESULTS: Of 512388 patients with AMI (mean age, 69.3 years; 33.5% women), 42187 (8.2%) had previous cancers. Patients with cancer had significantly lower use of ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (mean percentage point decrease [mppd], 2.6% [95% CI, 1.8–3.4]) and lower overall composite care (mppd, 1.2% [95% CI, 0.9–1.6]). Poorer quality indicator attainment was observed in patients with cancer diagnosed in the last year (mppd, 1.4% [95% CI, 1.8–1.0]), with later stage disease (mppd, 2.5% [95% CI, 3.3–1.4]), and with lung cancer (mppd, 2.2% [95% CI, 3.0–1.3]). Twelve-month all-cause survival was 90.5% in noncancer controls and 86.3% in adjusted counterfactual controls. Differences in post-AMI survival were driven by cancer-related deaths. Modeling improving quality indicator attainment to noncancer patient levels showed modest 12-month survival benefits (lung cancer, 0.6%; other cancers, 0.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Measures of quality of AMI care are poorer in patients with cancer, with lower use of secondary prevention medications. Findings are primarily driven by differences in age and comorbidities between cancer and noncancer populations and attenuated after adjustment. The largest impact was observed in recent cancer diagnoses (<1 year) and lung cancer. Further investigation will determine whether differences reflect appropriate management according to cancer prognosis or whether opportunities to improve AMI outcomes in patients with cancer exist