“Should SCAI update its position on the role of Public Reporting?”

McCabe, James M.; Dn, Feldman; Mahmud, Ehtisham; Pl, Duffy; Lc, Box; J, Jeffrey Marshall; Ss, Naidu; Fontana, John L.; Gerlach, Anja; Hite, Denise; Meikle, Joie; Kiely, Mary; White, Sharon; Yowe, Susan

doi:10.1002/ccd.27908

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These include the ability to exclude the highest risk patients, report at the institutional not operator level, extend time interval of accumulated data, present disease related (i.e., acute MI) rather than procedure related mortality, and include variables such as “compassionate use” within models. Public reporting should be supported while physicians and societies remain committed to assuring that relevant data is available to the public and that improvements in outcomes are ultimately realized 122,123 …”

Section: Catheterization Laboratory Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

SCAI expert consensus update on best practices in the cardiac catheterization laboratory

Naidu

Abbott

Bagai

et al. 2021

Cathet Cardio Intervent

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current document commissioned by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) and endorsed by the American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, and Heart Rhythm Society represents a comprehensive update to the 2012 and 2016 consensus documents on patient‐centered best practices in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. Comprising updates to staffing and credentialing, as well as evidence‐based updates to the pre‐, intra‐, and post‐procedural logistics, clinical standards and patient flow, the document also includes an expanded section on CCL governance, administration, and approach to quality metrics. This update also acknowledges the collaboration with various specialties, including discussion of the heart team approach to management, and working with electrophysiology colleagues in particular. It is hoped that this document will be utilized by hospitals, health systems, as well as regulatory bodies involved in assuring and maintaining quality, safety, efficiency, and cost‐effectiveness of patient throughput in this high volume area.

show abstract

Section: Catheterization Laboratory Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

SCAI expert consensus update on best practices in the cardiac catheterization laboratory

Naidu

Abbott

Bagai

et al. 2021

Cathet Cardio Intervent

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Management of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Complicating Acute Coronary Syndromes

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceptions of Public and Nonpublic Reporting of Interventional Cardiology Outcomes and Its Impact on Practice: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program

Morrison

Plomondon²,

O’Donnell³

et al. 2019

JAHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPhysicians have expressed significant mistrust with public reporting of interventional cardiology outcomes. Similar data are not available on alternative reporting structures, including nonpublic quality improvement programs with internally distributed measures of interventional quality. We thus sought to evaluate the perceptions of public and nonpublic reporting of interventional cardiology outcomes and its impact on clinical practice.Methods and ResultsA standardized survey was distributed to 218 interventional cardiologists in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, with responses received from 62 (28%). The majority of respondents (90%) expressed some or a great deal of trust in the analytic methods used to generate reports in a nonpublic quality improvement system within Veterans Affairs, while a minority (35%) expressed similar trust in the analytic methods in a public reporting system that operates outside Veterans Affairs (P<0.001). Similarly, a minority of respondents (44%) felt that in‐hospital and 30‐day mortality accurately reflected interventional quality in a nonpublic quality improvement system, though a smaller proportion of survey participants (15%) felt that the same outcome reflected procedural quality in public reporting systems (P<0.001). Despite these sentiments, the majority of operators did not feel pressured to avoid (82% and 75%; P=0.383) or perform (72% and 63%; P=0.096) high‐risk procedures within or outside Veterans Affairs.ConclusionsInterventional cardiologists express greater trust in analytic methods and clinical outcomes reported in a nonpublic quality improvement program than external public reporting environments. The majority of physicians did not feel pressured to avoid or perform high‐risk procedures, which may improve access to interventional care among high‐risk patients.

show abstract

“Should SCAI update its position on the role of Public Reporting?”

Cited by 3 publications

References 14 publications

SCAI expert consensus update on best practices in the cardiac catheterization laboratory

SCAI expert consensus update on best practices in the cardiac catheterization laboratory

Management of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Complicating Acute Coronary Syndromes

Perceptions of Public and Nonpublic Reporting of Interventional Cardiology Outcomes and Its Impact on Practice: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About