BackgroundThe use of clinical quality registries as means for data driven improvement in healthcare seem promising. However, their use has been shown to be challenged by a number of aspects, and we suggest some may be related to poor implementation. There is a paucity of literature regarding barriers and facilitators for registry implementation, in particular aspects related to data collection and entry. We aimed to illuminate this by exploring how staff perceive the implementation process related to the registries within the field of cardiac rehabilitation in England and Denmark.MethodsA qualitative, interview-based study with staff involved in collecting and/or entering data into the two case registries (England N = 12, Denmark N = 12). Interviews were analysed using content analysis. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to guide interviews and the interpretation of results.ResultsThe analysis identified both similarities and differences within and between the studied registries, and resulted in clarification of staffs´ experiences in an overarching theme: ´Struggling with practices´ and five categories; the data entry process, registry quality, resources and management support, quality improvement and the wider healthcare context. Overall, implementation received little focused attention. There was a lack of active support from management, and staff may experience a struggle of fitting use of a registry into a busy and complex everyday practice.ConclusionThe study highlights factors that may be important to consider when planning and implementing a new clinical quality registry within the field of cardiac rehabilitation, and is possibly transferrable to other fields. The results may thus be useful for policy makers, administrators and managers within the field and beyond. Targeting barriers and utilizing knowledge of facilitating factors is vital in order to improve the process of registry implementation, hence helping to achieve the intended improvement of care processes and outcomes.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-3940-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

This study shows a significant and linear relationship between lower global and physical HRQL scores in patients with IHD and 5-year all-cause mortality and cardiac readmission.

A politically initiated national clinical guideline was launched in Denmark in 2013 to improve quality and equality of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) services. The guideline is to be implemented in both hospital and community (municipality) settings due to shared responsibility for provision of CR services. Little is known about implementation outcomes of a guideline in these two settings. We aimed to study this by determining the extent to which Danish CR services in hospitals and municipalities adhered to national recommendations following the launch of the guideline. The study employed an observational, longitudinal design. Data were gathered by a questionnaire survey to compare CR services at baseline, measured in 2013 immediately before the guideline was launched, with CR services at a two-year follow up in 2015. All Danish hospital departments offering CR services (N = 36) and all municipalities (N = 98) were included. Data were analysed using inferential statistics. Hospitals reported improvement of both content and quality of CR services. Municipalities reported no change in content of services, and lower level of fulfilment of one quality aspect. The results suggest that the guideline had different impact in hospitals and municipalities and that the differences in content and quality of services between the two settings increased in the study period, thus contradicting the guideline´s aim of uniform, evidence-based content of CR services across settings.

No abstract