Development of a core set of quality indicators for paediatric primary care practices in Europe, COSI-PPC-EU

Development of a set of quality indicators in paediatric and perinatal care in Japan with a modified Delphi method

BACKGROUNDS

Few paediatric and perinatal quality indicators (QIs) have been developed in the Japanese setting, and the quality of care is not assured or validated. The aim of this study was to develop QIs in paediatric and perinatal care in Japan using an administrative database and confirm the feasibility and applicability of the indicators using a single-site practice test.

METHODS

We used a RAND-modified Delphi method that integrates evidence review with expert consensus development. QI candidates were generated from clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) available in English or Japanese and existing QIs in nine selected paediatric or perinatal conditions. Consensus building was based on independent panel ratings. The performance of QIs was retrospectively assessed using data from an administrative database at the National Children's Hospital. Data between April 2018 and March 2019 were used, while data between April 2019 and March 2021 were also used for selected condition, considering the small number of patients. Each QI was calculated as follows: number of times the indicator was met/number of participants×100.

RESULTS

From the literature review conducted between 2010 and 2020, 124 CPGs and 193 existing indicators were identified to generate QI candidates. Through the consensus-building process, 133 QI candidates were assessed and 79 QIs were accepted. The practice test revealed wide variations in the process-level performance of QIs in four categories: patient safety: median 43.9% (IQR 16.7%-85.6%), general paediatrics: median 98.8% (IQR 84.2%-100%), advanced paediatrics: median 94.4% (IQR 46.0%-100%) and advanced obstetrics: median 80.3% (IQR 59.6%-100%).

CONCLUSIONS

We established 79 QIs for paediatric and perinatal care in Japan using an administrative database that can be applied to hospitals nationwide. The practice test confirmed the measurability of the developed QIs. Benchmarking these QIs will be an attractive approach to improving the quality of care.

Process over outcome quality in paediatrics? An analysis of outpatient healthcare quality indicators for seven common diseases

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the scope, quality dimensions and treatment aspects covered by existing quality indicators (QIs) for the somatic diseases bronchial asthma, atopic eczema, otitis media and tonsillitis as well as the psychiatric disorders attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), depression and conduct disorder in paediatrics.

METHODS

QIs were identified through an analysis of the guidelines and a systematic search of literature and indicator databases. Subsequently, two researchers independently assigned the QIs to the quality dimensions according to Donabedian and Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and to the content categories covering the treatment process.

RESULTS

We found 1268 QIs for bronchial asthma, 335 QIs for depression, 199 QIs for ADHD, 115 QIs for otitis media, 72 QIs for conduct disorder, 52 QIs for tonsillitis and 50 QIs for atopic eczema. Of these, 78% focused on process quality, 20% on outcome quality and 2% on structural quality. Using OECD criteria, 72% of the QIs were assigned to effectiveness, 17% to patient-centredness, 11% to patient safety and 1% to efficiency. The QIs covered the following categories: diagnostics (30%), therapy (38%), patient-reported outcome measures/ observer-reported outcome measures/patient-reported experience measures (in sum 11%), health monitoring (11%) and office management (11%).

CONCLUSION

Most QIs focused on the dimensions of effectiveness and process quality, and on the categories of diagnostics and therapy, with outcome-focused and patient-focused QIs being under-represented. Possible reasons for this striking imbalance could be the easier measurability and clearer assignment of accountability in comparison to the QIs of outcome quality, patient-centredness and patient safety. To produce a more balanced picture of the quality of healthcare, the future development of QIs should prioritise the currently under-represented dimensions.

Assessment of the quality of routine ambulatory healthcare for common disorders in children and adolescents in Germany: study protocol for a retrospective medical record review (QualiPäd)

INTRODUCTION

The quality of healthcare in childhood and adolescence is of key importance, in order to foster a healthy development and to avoid chronic health problems. Yet, data for Germany regarding the quality of healthcare for this patient group are lacking. The QualiPäd research project aims to estimate the quality of outpatient healthcare for children and adolescents in Germany, focusing on common psychiatric and physical disorders.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Quality indicators for seven common physical and mental childhood and adolescent clinical conditions (attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, asthma, atopic dermatitis, depression, otitis media, conduct disorder/oppositional defiant disorder, tonsillitis) will be developed and ratified by experts, using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.Initially, 1400 medical records of children and adolescents with one of the aforementioned clinical conditions will then be randomly drawn from 40 outpatient practices in the German federal state of Hessen. The records will then be assessed regarding their adherence to the respective quality indicators. Based on this, the percentage of appropriate and inappropriate (eg, wasteful) healthcare of all clinical conditions (primary endpoint) will be estimated. Additionally, possible factors influencing the quality of care (eg, patient characteristics, type of condition, type of practice) will be identified using generalised estimation equation models.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will show for which of the studied clinical conditions and/or patients improvement of quality of care is necessary within the German health system. Also, the quality indicators designed for the study can afterwards be implemented in regular care and thus enable regular reporting of the outpatient care of this target group. The authors plan to disseminate their findings through international, peer-reviewed scientific publications, and through presentations at national and international paediatric and child psychiatric conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00022408.

What makes a good quality indicator set? A systematic review of criteria

BACKGROUND

While single indicators measure a specific aspect of quality (e.g. timely support during labour), users of these indicators, such as patients, providers and policy-makers, are typically interested in some broader construct (e.g. quality of maternity care) whose measurement requires a set of indicators. However, guidance on desirable properties of indicator sets is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

Based on the premise that a set of valid indicators does not guarantee a valid set of indicators, the aim of this review is 2-fold: First, we introduce content validity as a desirable property of indicator sets and review the extent to which studies in the peer-reviewed health care quality literature address this criterion. Second, to obtain a complete inventory of criteria, we examine what additional criteria of quality indicator sets were used so far.

METHODS

We searched the databases Web of Science, Medline, Cinahl and PsycInfo from inception to May 2021 and the reference lists of included studies. English- or German-language, peer-reviewed studies concerned with desirable characteristics of quality indicator sets were included. Applying qualitative content analysis, two authors independently coded the articles using a structured coding scheme and discussed conflicting codes until consensus was reached.

RESULTS

Of 366 studies screened, 62 were included in the review. Eighty-five per cent (53/62) of studies addressed at least one of the component criteria of content validity (content coverage, proportional representation and contamination) and 15% (9/62) addressed all component criteria. Studies used various content domains to structure the targeted construct (e.g. quality dimensions, elements of the care pathway and policy priorities), providing a framework to assess content validity. The review revealed four additional substantive criteria for indicator sets: cost of measurement (21% [13/62] of the included studies), prioritization of 'essential' indicators (21% [13/62]), avoidance of redundancy (13% [8/62]) and size of the set (15% [9/62]). Additionally, four procedural criteria were identified: stakeholder involvement (69% [43/62]), using a conceptual framework (44% [27/62]), defining the purpose of measurement (26% [16/62]) and transparency of the development process (8% [5/62]).

CONCLUSION

The concept of content validity and its component criteria help assessing whether conclusions based on a set of indicators are valid conclusions about the targeted construct. To develop a valid indicator set, careful definition of the targeted construct including its (sub-)domains is paramount. Developers of quality indicators should specify the purpose of measurement and consider trade-offs with other criteria for indicator sets whose application may reduce content validity (e.g. costs of measurement) in light thereof.

Primary care of mothers and infants by the same or different physicians: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Different primary care delivery models exist for mothers and their infants. We examined whether primary care system performance measures differed when mother-infant dyads received primary care from the same or different providers.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study using Ontario health administrative data from 2004 to 2016. We included primiparous women and their singleton term infants and classified the primary care practitioners who provided the majority of care to the infant and the mother as concordant (same family physician for both; reference group), discordant (a different family physician for each) or pediatrician (pediatrician for the child, family physician for the mother). The primary outcome was nonobstetric maternal hospital admissions between 42 days and 2 years after delivery.

RESULTS

Among 481 721 mother-child pairs, 239 033 (49.6%) received concordant care, 114 006 (23.7%) received discordant care, and 128 682 (26.7%) received pediatrician care. Mothers in the pediatrician group were older and had greater comorbidity. Relative to concordant care, maternal nonobstetric hospital admissions occurred similarly under discordant care (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96-1.04) and in the pediatrician group (adjusted OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.02). Maternal deaths were similar under discordant care (adjusted OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.62-1.63) but lower in the pediatrician group (adjusted OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.89). Maternal primary care visits were lower in both the discordant group (adjusted relative risk [RR] 0.68, 95% CI 0.68-0.69) and the pediatrician group (adjusted RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.75-0.76). Healthy children were more likely to miss the enhanced 18-month well-baby visit under discordant care (adjusted OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.03-1.09) but less likely to miss this visit under pediatrician care (adjusted OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.46-0.49).

INTERPRETATION

Concordant care provided to a new mother and her infant by the same family physician was not associated with better primary care health system performance. The reason that pediatric primary care is associated with better maternal and child outcomes remains to be determined.

Care recommendations for the respiratory complications of esophageal atresia-tracheoesophageal fistula

Tracheoesophageal fistula (TEF) with esophageal atresia (EA) is a common congenital anomaly that is associated with significant respiratory morbidity throughout life. The objective of this document is to provide a framework for the diagnosis and management of the respiratory complications that are associated with the condition. As there are no randomized controlled studies on the subject, a group of experts used a modification of the Rand Appropriateness Method to describe the various aspects of the condition in terms of their relative importance, and to rate the available diagnostic methods and therapeutic interventions on the basis of their appropriateness and necessity. Specific recommendations were formulated and reported as Level A, B, and C based on whether they were based on "strong", "moderate" or "weak" agreement. The tracheomalacia that exists in the site of the fistula was considered the main abnormality that predisposes to all other respiratory complications due to airway collapse and impaired clearance of secretions. Aspiration due to impaired airway protection reflexes is the main underlying contributing mechanism. Flexible bronchoscopy is the main diagnostic modality, aided by imaging modalities, especially CT scans of the chest. Noninvasive positive airway pressure support, surgical techniques such as tracheopexy and rarely tracheostomy are required for the management of severe tracheomalacia. Regular long-term follow-up by a multidisciplinary team was considered imperative. Specific templates outlining the elements of the clinical respiratory evaluation according to the patients' age were also developed.

Paediatricians provide higher quality care to children and adolescents in primary care: A systematic review

AIM

The number of primary care paediatricians is decreasing in Europe without a justifiable reason. We aimed to compare the clinical practice of paediatricians and family doctors attending children and adolescents in primary care.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, TRIP and Google Scholar were searched from December 2008 to February 2018. No language or study design restrictions were applied. Three reviewers assessed eligibility of the studies. Seven pairs of reviewers performed the data extraction and assessed the methodological quality independently. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS

Fifty-four, out of 1150 studies preselected, were included. We found that paediatricians show more appropriate pharmacology prescription patterns for the illness being treated; they achieve higher vaccination rates and have better knowledge of vaccines and fewer doubts about vaccine safety; their knowledge and implementation of different screening tests are better; they prescribe psychoactive drugs more cautiously and more in line with current practice guidelines; their evaluation and treatment of obesity and lipid disorders follow criteria more consistently with current clinical practice guidelines; and they perform fewer diagnostic test, show a more suitable use of the test and request fewer referrals to specialists.

CONCLUSION

According to published data, in developed countries, paediatricians provide higher quality care to children than family doctors.

Variations in pediatric hospitalization in seven European countries

OBJECTIVE

To compare rates of pediatric hospital utilization across seven European countries.

METHODS

Secondary data from WHO's European Hospital Morbidity Database from 2009 to 2012. Cross- country comparison of rates of admissions and bed days per 100 person-years by clinical service. We tabulated counts of admissions and bed days by principal diagnosis and age group for Ireland, Austria, Hungary, Belgium, Spain, Germany, and France. ICD 9 or ICD 10 or ISHMT diagnosis codes were allocated to clinical services. Normal newborn admissions were excluded from the analysis. Simple linear regression models, weighted by pediatric population size, were constructed to estimate the relationships between health care utilization and factors that may influence variation in care.

RESULTS

Hospital admission across the seven countries ranged from 9.41 (Spain) to 19.59 (Germany) admissions per 100 person-years. Bed days ranged from a low of 52.50 (Spain) to 135.44 (Germany) per 100 person-years. General pediatrics and neonatology led in clinical volume across all countries. Infectious disease admissions were the third most common. Bed supply and nurse supply were positively associated with health care utilization. Out-of-pocket payment was inversely associated with health care utilization CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of utilization of pediatric inpatient care was observed across seven European countries that have universal coverage. Variation in the provision of effective, supply-sensitive, and preference-sensitive care may explain some of the variations. Our study shows that it is probable that preventable hospital admissions are occurring in the pediatric population.

The perspectives of parents, general practitioners, and community pharmacists about treating an ill child in primary care: a comparative study

As children are unable to make health-related decisions themselves, parents play a central role in consultations with healthcare providers. Parents' perspectives are therefore the focus of this study. Our first aim was to determine parents' expectations of a healthcare visit with a general practitioner and a community pharmacist. The second aim was to determine the general practitioners' and community pharmacists' perspectives about consultations with children. An observational cross-sectional study was conducted in April and May 2018. We developed three questionnaires: one for parents, one for general practitioners, and one for community pharmacists. The questionnaire for parents was only available through an online platform. The healthcare providers were questioned face-to-face and through an online platform. The study included 380 respondents. Parents considered prescribing or proposing medication the least important action by a general practitioner or community pharmacist, respectively. As well, parents expect information in most cases from both healthcare providers. The questionnaire for general practitioners and community pharmacists revealed that prescribing or proposing medication was regarded the least important action.Conclusion: Considering parents' expectations for a consultation with a general practitioner or community pharmacist, there is a substantial resemblance with the healthcare providers' perspective.What is Known:• The previous studies focusing on parents' perspectives were carried out in a hospital setting or focused on a specific disorder.• Parents consider reassurance and advice from their general practitioner to be very important; the treatment is considered less important.What is New:• Parents considered for both general practitioners' and community pharmacists' verbal information, answers to their questions, and reassurance as more important than receiving pharmacological treatment, while general practitioners and community pharmacists consider prescribing/proposing medication and providing written information as less important.• The expectations of the different groups (parents in relation to not only the healthcare providers but also the general practitioners and community pharmacists compared to each other) know a great resemblance.

Feasibility testing of the Core set of quality Indicators for Paediatric Primary Care in Europe, COSI-PPC-EU

There is a need to measure and improve the quality of paediatric primary care in Europe where major differences in the delivery and outcomes of child health care exist. A collaborative panel of paediatric senior experts developed a Core Set of Indicators for Paediatric Primary Care in Europe by compiling 42 quality indicators in a modified consensus process following the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of the quality indicator set in European paediatric primary care practices. Seventy-nine practices from eight countries participated in a detailed online interview. The practices rated the applicability, relevance, reliability and acceptance of the 42 quality indicator as well as the availability, technical feasibility and effort to retrieve the needed data from their medical records. Most quality indicators were considered applicable, available, reliable, acceptable and relevant for monitoring quality of care in paediatric primary care. Respondents rated feasibility and effort to retrieve the data lowest because of difficulties collecting the data from the medical records.Conclusion: European paediatric primary care practices generally agree with the proposed quality indicator set. They document most of the parameters. However, the collection of specific needed values from available routine patient-data is considered technically difficult and time-consuming. What is Known? • Paediatric primary care systems in Europe show striking differences in their performance. Pre-existing sets of quality indicators are predominantly limited to national populations, specific diseases and hospital care. • A Core Set of 42 quality indicators for paediatric primary care in Europe was developed by European paediatricians using a systematic literature review and a consensus process following a modified RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. What is New? • Paediatric primary care providers in Europe agree with the idea to use COSI-PPC-EU to monitor and improve the quality of care. The set was considered applicable, available, reliable, acceptable, and relevant for quality improvement. • The score for feasibility and effort to retrieve the data was low, because of technical reasons; the electronical or paper-based medical documentation in most cases does not allow convenient access to all necessary data.