BackgroundNational quality registries (NQRs) purportedly facilitate quality improvement, while neither the extent nor the mechanisms of such a relationship are fully known. The aim of this case study is to describe the experiences of local stakeholders to determine those elements that facilitate and hinder clinical quality improvement in relation to participation in a well-known and established NQR on stroke in Sweden.MethodsA strategic sample was drawn of 8 hospitals in 4 county councils, representing a variety of settings and outcomes according to the NQR’s criteria. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 25 managers, physicians in charge of the Riks-Stroke, and registered nurses registering local data at the hospitals. Interviews, including aspects of barriers and facilitators within the NQR and the local context, were analysed with content analysis.ResultsAn NQR can provide vital aspects for facilitating evidence-based practice, for example, local data drawn from national guidelines which can be used for comparisons over time within the organisation or with other hospitals. Major effort is required to ensure that data entries are accurate and valid, and thus the trustworthiness of local data output competes with resources needed for everyday clinical stroke care and quality improvement initiatives. Local stakeholders with knowledge of and interest in both the medical area (in this case stroke) and quality improvement can apply the NQR data to effectively initiate, carry out, and evaluate quality improvement, if supported by managers and co-workers, a common stroke care process and an operational management system that embraces and engages with the NQR data.ConclusionWhile quality registries are assumed to support adherence to evidence-based guidelines around the world, this study proposes that a NQR can facilitate improvement of care but neither the registry itself nor the reporting of data initiates quality improvement. Rather, the local and general evidence provided by the NQR must be considered relevant and must be applied in the local context. Further, the quality improvement process needs to be facilitated by stakeholders collaborating within and outside the context, who know how to initiate, perform, and evaluate quality improvement, and who have the resources to do so.

Objectives: While national quality registries (NQRs) are suggested to provide opportunities for systematic follow-up and learning opportunities, and thus clinical improvements, features in registries and contexts triggering such processes are not fully known. This study focuses on one of the world's largest stroke registries, the Swedish NQR Riksstroke, investigating what aspects of the registry and healthcare organisations facilitate or hinder the use of registry data in clinical quality improvement. Methods: Following particular qualitative studies,we performed a quantitative survey in an exploratory sequential design. The survey, including 50 items on context, processes and the registry, was sent to managers, physicians and nurses engaged in Riksstroke in all 72 Swedish stroke units. Altogether, 242 individuals were presented with the survey; 163 responded, representing all but two units. Data were analysed descriptively and through multiple linear regression.

BackgroundSocioeconomic status, origin or demographic attributes shall not determine the quality of healthcare delivery, according to e.g. United Nations and European Union rules. Health equity has been defined as the absence of systematic disparities and unwarranted differences between groups defined by differences in social advantages. A study was performed to investigate whether this was applicable to type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) care in a setting with universal, tax-funded healthcare.MethodsThis retrospective registry-study was based on patient-level data from individuals diagnosed with T1D during 2010–2011 (n = 16,367) in any of seven Swedish county councils (covering ~65% of the Swedish population). Health equity in T1D care was analysed through multivariate regression analyses on absolute HbA1c level at one-year follow-up, one-year change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and one-year change in cardiovascular risk score, using selected sociodemographic dimensions as case-mix factors.ResultsHigher educational level was consistently associated with lower levels of HbA1c, and so was being married. Never married was associated with worse eGFR development, and lower educational level was associated with higher cardiovascular risk. Women had higher HbA1c levels than men, and glucose control was significantly worse in patients below the age of 25.ConclusionPatients’ sociodemographic profile was strongly associated with absolute levels of risk factor control in T1D, but also with an increased annual deterioration in eGFR. Whether these systematic differences stem from patient-related problems or healthcare organisational shortcomings is a matter for further research. The results, though, highlight the need for intensified diabetes management education and secondary prevention directed towards T1D patients, taking sociodemographic characteristics into account.

BackgroundThrough a national policy agreement, over 167 million Euros will be invested in the Swedish National Quality Registries (NQRs) between 2012 and 2016. One of the policy agreement’s intentions is to increase the use of NQR data for quality improvement (QI). However, the evidence is fragmented as to how the use of medical registries and the like lead to quality improvement, and little is known about non-clinical use. The aim was therefore to investigate the perspectives of Swedish politicians and administrators on quality improvement based on national registry data.MethodsPoliticians and administrators from four county councils were interviewed. A qualitative content analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was performed.ResultsThe politicians’ and administrators’ perspectives on the use of NQR data for quality improvement were mainly assigned to three of the five CFIR domains. In the domain of intervention characteristics, data reliability and access in reasonable time were not considered entirely satisfactory, making it difficult for the politico-administrative leaderships to initiate, monitor, and support timely QI efforts. Still, politicians and administrators trusted the idea of using the NQRs as a base for quality improvement. In the domain of inner setting, the organizational structures were not sufficiently developed to utilize the advantages of the NQRs, and readiness for implementation appeared to be inadequate for two reasons. Firstly, the resources for data analysis and quality improvement were not considered sufficient at politico-administrative or clinical level. Secondly, deficiencies in leadership engagement at multiple levels were described and there was a lack of consensus on the politicians’ role and level of involvement. Regarding the domain of outer setting, there was a lack of communication and cooperation between the county councils and the national NQR organizations.ConclusionsThe Swedish experiences show that a government-supported national system of well-funded, well-managed, and reputable national quality registries needs favorable local politico-administrative conditions to be used for quality improvement; such conditions are not yet in place according to local politicians and administrators.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0189-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

While there were significant differences between registries in key factors such as management interest, use of NQR data in local quality improvement seems rather prevalent, at least for Riksstroke. The link between the registry's level of development and factors important for routinization of innovations such as NQRs needs investigation.