Cardiac audit, data and registries: evolution of a national programme

Abstract

The UK is one of the few countries in the world with national registries that record key statistics across a broad range of cardiovascular disorders. The British Cardiovascular Society and its affiliated groups have played a central role in the development of these registries and continue to provide clinical oversight to the present day. Seven of the UK’s national registries are now integrated under the management of the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research (NICOR) that currently holds records on nearly 6.5 million episodes of care since 1990. This represents a substantial data resource for national audit that has driven up standards of cardiovascular care in the UK with a palpable impact on patient outcomes. The registries have also spawned an impressive programme of research providing novel insights into the epidemiology of cardiovascular disease. Linkage with other datasets and international collaborations create the environment for new outputs, new opportunities for ‘big data’ research and new ways of performing clinical trials. As the centenary of the British Cardiac Society (now British Cardiovascular Society) approaches, its role in the development of the UK’s cardiovascular audits can be counted as one of its outstanding achievements.

RETRACTED: Organizational and patient-level predictors for attaining key risk factor targets in cardiac rehabilitation after myocardial infarction: The Perfect-CR study

“…Other structurebased variables of importance were having adequate facilities, operational team meetings and patient case meetings. Also, using audit data for quality improvement was predictive of both outcomes, strengthening prior conclusions on the importance of auditing for quality improvement in cardiac care [23]. Interestingly, hours spent with a nurse and/or physician during follow-up were not predictive of attaining LDL-C or BP targets, and the number of nurses in staff was only predictive of attaining LDL-C.…”

Hiding behind ‘innovation’: the case for regulated risk assessment in surgery

“…Consequently, innovations associated with harms/risks go unreported (unless picked up by regulators, the coroner, and/or the media) and future innovators cannot learn from them, meaning mistakes may be repeated. Mandated (cardiac surgery) 8 and optional (e.g. arthroplasty) registries are designed to monitor standard (not innovative) procedures, and data capture is not routine.…”