Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Public Health 1/2021

13.07.2019 | Original Article

Effectiveness of the IQM peer review procedure to improve in-patient care—a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial (IMPRESS): study design and baseline results

verfasst von: Jochen Schmitt, Olaf Schoffer, Felix Walther, Martin Roessler, Xina Grählert, Maria Eberlein-Gonska, Peter C. Scriba, Ralf Kuhlen

Erschienen in: Journal of Public Health | Ausgabe 1/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Aim

The primary objective of the IMPRESS study is to assess the causal effects of the IQM peer review on mortality in patients ventilated > 24 h. Secondary analyses are conducted for mortality in patients with myocardial infarction, stroke, COPD, pneumonia, and the procedural provision of a colorectal resection. This article provides a description of the study design and presents baseline results.

Subjects and methods

Descriptive statistics for 231 included hospitals and patient characteristics.

Results

Due to randomization, the treatment/control group hospitals were similar with respect to the mortality in patients ventilated > 24 h and other patient and hospital characteristics at baseline. Mortality was highest (lowest) in patients ventilated > 24 h (with colorectal resection).

Conclusion

The IMPRESS study provides a unique opportunity to assess the impact of the IQM peer review on the mortality in patients ventilated > 24 h. The secondary, exploratory, and qualitative analyses are expected to provide insights on determinants of in-hospital mortality, structure and process quality, and the robustness of different approaches to risk adjustment of quality indicators.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Bundesärztekammer (2011) Curriculum “ärztliches peer review” Bundesärztekammer (2011) Curriculum “ärztliches peer review”
Zurück zum Zitat Dimick JB, Ryan AM (2014) Methods for evaluating changes in health care policy: the difference-in-differences approach. JAMA 312:2401–2402CrossRef Dimick JB, Ryan AM (2014) Methods for evaluating changes in health care policy: the difference-in-differences approach. JAMA 312:2401–2402CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RM (1998) Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care 36:8–27CrossRef Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RM (1998) Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care 36:8–27CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Eran O, Novack V, Gilutz H, Zahger D (2011) Comparison of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction, global registry of acute coronary events, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II risk scores in patients with acute myocardial infarction who require mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours. Am J Cardiol 107:343–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.09.024 CrossRefPubMed Eran O, Novack V, Gilutz H, Zahger D (2011) Comparison of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction, global registry of acute coronary events, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II risk scores in patients with acute myocardial infarction who require mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours. Am J Cardiol 107:343–346. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​amjcard.​2010.​09.​024 CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Grol R (1994) Quality improvement by peer review in primary care: a practical guide. Qual Health Care 3:147–152CrossRef Grol R (1994) Quality improvement by peer review in primary care: a practical guide. Qual Health Care 3:147–152CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Petzold T, Tesch F, Eberlein-Gonska M, Schmitt J (2017) Ermittlung geeigneter Kriterien als Entscheidungshilfe für die zielgerichtete Auslösung des IQM Peer Review Verfahrens. In: Eberlein-Gonska M, Martin J, Zacher J (eds) Handbuch IQM. Konsequent transparent - Qualität mit Routinedaten. Medizinisch Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, Berlin, pp 125–127 Petzold T, Tesch F, Eberlein-Gonska M, Schmitt J (2017) Ermittlung geeigneter Kriterien als Entscheidungshilfe für die zielgerichtete Auslösung des IQM Peer Review Verfahrens. In: Eberlein-Gonska M, Martin J, Zacher J (eds) Handbuch IQM. Konsequent transparent - Qualität mit Routinedaten. Medizinisch Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, Berlin, pp 125–127
Zurück zum Zitat Pouw ME, Peelen LM, Lingsma HF, Pieter D, Steyerberg E, Kalkman CJ, Moons KG (2013) Hospital standardized mortality ratio: consequences of adjusting hospital mortality with indirect standardization. PLoS One 8:e59160CrossRef Pouw ME, Peelen LM, Lingsma HF, Pieter D, Steyerberg E, Kalkman CJ, Moons KG (2013) Hospital standardized mortality ratio: consequences of adjusting hospital mortality with indirect standardization. PLoS One 8:e59160CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Rink O (2012) Das IQM Peer Review Verfahren–Ergebnisse der Initiative Qualitätsmedizin. Z für Evidenz, Fortbild und Qual im Gesundheitsw 106:560–565CrossRef Rink O (2012) Das IQM Peer Review Verfahren–Ergebnisse der Initiative Qualitätsmedizin. Z für Evidenz, Fortbild und Qual im Gesundheitsw 106:560–565CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Van Belle G, Fisher LD, Heagerty PJ, Lumley T (2004) Biostatistics: a methodology for the health sciences, 2nd edn. Wiley, HobokenCrossRef Van Belle G, Fisher LD, Heagerty PJ, Lumley T (2004) Biostatistics: a methodology for the health sciences, 2nd edn. Wiley, HobokenCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Effectiveness of the IQM peer review procedure to improve in-patient care—a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial (IMPRESS): study design and baseline results
verfasst von
Jochen Schmitt
Olaf Schoffer
Felix Walther
Martin Roessler
Xina Grählert
Maria Eberlein-Gonska
Peter C. Scriba
Ralf Kuhlen
Publikationsdatum
13.07.2019
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Journal of Public Health / Ausgabe 1/2021
Print ISSN: 2198-1833
Elektronische ISSN: 1613-2238
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-019-01118-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2021

Journal of Public Health 1/2021 Zur Ausgabe