Quality indicators and their regular use in clinical practice: results from a survey among users of two cardiovascular National Registries in Sweden.

Abstract

To examine the regular use of quality indicators from Swedish cardiovascular National Quality Registries (NQRs) by clinical staff; particularly differences in use between the two NQRs and between nurses and physicians. Cross-sectional online survey study. Two Swedish cardiovascular NQRs: (a) Swedish Heart Failure Registry and (b) Swedeheart. Clinicians (n =185; 70% nurses, 26% physicians) via the NQRs' email networks. Frequency of NQR use for (a) producing healthcare activity statistics; (b) comparing results between similar departments; (c) sharing results with colleagues; (d) identifying areas for quality improvement (QI); (e) surveilling the impact of QI efforts; (f) monitoring effects of implementation of new treatment methods; (g) doing research and (h) educating and informing healthcare professionals and patients. Median use of NQRs was 10 times a year (25th and 75th percentiles range: 3-23 times/year). Quality indicators from the NQRs were used mainly for producing healthcare activity statistics. Median use of Swedeheart was six times greater than Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF; P < 0.000). Physicians used the NQRs more than twice as often as nurses (18 vs. 7.5 times/year; P < 0.000) and perceived NQR work more often as meaningful. Around twice as many Swedeheart users had the role to participate in data analysis and in QI efforts compared to SwedeHF users. Most respondents used quality indicators from the two cardiovascular NQRs infrequently (<3 times/year). The results indicate that linking registration of quality indicators to using them for QI activities increases their routine use and makes them meaningful tools for professionals.