Login / Signup

Monitoring compliance with standards of care for chronic diseases using healthcare administrative databases in Italy: Strengths and limitations.

Rosa GiniMartijn J SchuemieAlessandro PasquaEmanuele CarliniFrancesco ProfiliIacopo CricelliPatrizio DazziValentina BarlettaPaolo FrancesconiFrancesco LapiAndrea DonatiniGiulia Dal CoModesta ViscaMariadonata BellentaniMiriam SturkenboomNiek Klazinga
Published in: PloS one (2017)
IAD overestimated the percentage of patients compliant with therapeutic standards by less than 6 percentage points, and underestimated the percentage of patients compliant with diagnostic standards by a maximum of 14 percentage points. Therefore, both discussions at local level between GP's and local health unit managers and discussions at central level between national and regional policy makers can be informed by indicators of compliance estimated by IAD, which, based on those results, have the ability of signalling critical or excellent clusters. However, this study found that estimates are partly flawed, because a high number of patients with chronic diseases are not detected by IAD, patients detected are not representative of the whole population of patients, and some categories of diagnostic tests are markedly underrecorded in IAD (up to 50% in the case of electrocardiograms). Those results call to caution when interpreting IAD estimates. Audits based on medical records, on the local level, and an interpretation taking into account information external to IAD, on the central level, are needed to assess a more comprehensive compliance with standards.
Keyphrases