1 / 42

The Quality Agenda for UK nephrology

The Quality Agenda for UK nephrology. Charlie Tomson President, Renal Association. SpR club meeting, London, Saturday 18 th September 2010. Conflicts of interest. No financial or other relationships with pharmaceutical companies for at least the last 5 years, in particular no Directorships

truly
Télécharger la présentation

The Quality Agenda for UK nephrology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Quality Agenda for UK nephrology Charlie Tomson President, Renal Association SpR club meeting, London, Saturday 18th September 2010

  2. Conflicts of interest • No financial or other relationships with pharmaceutical companies for at least the last 5 years, in particular no • Directorships • Advisory boards • Free trips to conferences • Free lunches or dinners • ACCEA Silver award

  3. Outline • Dimensions of quality • Quality improvement in healthcare • The political context, 2010 • Quality in nephrology • QI in nephrology

  4. Why am I here? • (because I was hoping to get to the Saturday night SpR club drinking session) • Social and Political Science part II • Long involvement in RA standards and guidelines (including CKD guidelines) • 1y Health Foundation Quality Improvement Fellowship at Institute for Healthcare Improvement • 4y as UKRR chairman

  5. Dimensions of quality • Safe – no needless harm • Timely – no needless waits • Efficient – maximise health gain per £ • Effective – evidence-based • Equitable – irrespective of race, literacy, income, BMI • Patient-centred – the patient at the centre • Sustainable – meet the needs of today without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs

  6. Quality Improvement mantras • If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it • Every system is perfectly designed to deliver the results it delivers • Human beings make mistakes, and attention to human factors can reduce risk • Achieving change in complex organisations requires ‘profound knowledge’ as well as subject matter knowledge

  7. Appreciation of a System Theory of Knowledge Psychology Understanding Variation Values

  8. The political context • Darzi ‘Next Stage Review’ – focus on clinical dimensions of quality (safe, effective, patient-centred) • Quality, Innovation, Prevention, Productivity programme • ‘Flat cash’ funding • Coalition White Paper – ‘nothing about me without me

  9. Rising numbers, flat cash: a perfect storm Byrne C et al. UKRR 12th Annual Report, Chapter 4. Nephron Clin Pract 2010;115 (suppl 1): c41-c68

  10. Andrew Lansley: priorities • Patients: no decision about us without us • Focus on outcomes, not process targets • Empower professionals to deliver • Prioritise prevention to reduce inequity • Integrate health and social care http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/MediaCentre/Speeches/DH_116643

  11. DH/IC Indicators for Quality Improvement

  12. Q: What’s this got to do with me? • I’m a renal SpR, not a manager • I’m not the Clinical Director • If they want better care, they need to spend more money • My responsibility is to the patient in front of me

  13. A: • “It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory” W. Edwards Deming

  14. Quality of renal care • Safe • Timely • Efficient • Effective • Equitable • Patient-Centred • Sustainable

  15. Safety of renal care • (covered by Simon Watson last SpR club) • NPSA signals – mostly related to HD, equipment • Drug interactions • Drug-induced leucopenia • In-hospital pulmonary oedema • Anticoagulation control • Infection control – C Diff, line infections, pneumonia

  16. Timeliness of renal care • Multiple clinic visits • Nephrology • Vascular mapping • Vascular access • Education • Psychology • Transplant assessment • + all the other specialties involved

  17. Effectiveness of renal care • Evidence-based care: reliable implementation of available evidence • Dialysis dose • ?phosphate control? • Protocol-based management of vasculitis according to RCT evidence • Protocol-based transplant management

  18. Efficiency in kidney care? • Increasing focus on who starts RRT and when • Benefits amongst elderly pts with co-morbidity/nursing home residents? • eGFR at start (including pre-emptive Tp) • Increasing focus on reducing waste in each clinical pathway • Alternative: go back to overt or covert rationing

  19. Efficiency of renal care • Reducing cost per case • Complicated by primary/secondary care funding split • Payment per episode • Higher payments for RRT vs conservative • Higher payments for admissions with complications vs no complications • 80% of NHS costs are salaries

  20. Guy’s/RA: reducing costs of kidney care: 17th Sept 2010 • Nick Richards (Fresenius): • achieve adequate URR by increasing t and Qb; reduce clinical waste; stop employing ‘co-ordinators’ and talk to each other; link payments to outcome measures • Lisa Burnapp (DH, Guy’s) • Do more pre-emptive LRD transplants • Patrick Harnett (Southend) • Rationalise use of ambulance transport for dialysis • Richard Fluck (Derby) • Reduce access-related infections, pneumonia

  21. Guy’s/RA: reducing costs of kidney care: 17th Sept 2010 - 2 • Sandip Mitra (Manchester) • Expand use of home HD • Peter Rutherford (Baxter) • Increase use of PD as initial therapy by working on shared decision-making • Charlie Tomson (Bristol) • Reduce low-added-value OP appointments • Frances Mortimer (Campaign for Greener HC) • Reduce Carbon and save money • Jane Macdonald (Hope) • Reduce use of bank nurses and reduce long-term sickness absence

  22. “Rising tide” of ESRD due to earlier start? Rosansky SJ. Kidney International 2009; 76: 257-261

  23. Survival from day 1 vs eGFR at start: EDTA-ERA Stel V et al. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2009;24; 3175-3182

  24. eGFR at start in Europe, 1999 and 2003 Stel V et al. NDT 2010; doi 10.1093/ndt/gfq209

  25. 828 patients with eGFR 10-15 randomised to start at eGFR 10-14 vs 5-7 (+clinical discretion) Median time from randomisation 1.8 vs 7.4 months Median eGFR at start 12.0 vs 9.8 NEJM 2010; 363: 609-619

  26. NEJM 2009; 361: 1539-1547

  27. Survival from eGFR 10.8 ml/min/1.73m2 Carson R. CJASN 2009; 4: 1611-1619

  28. Supply-led demand? • Unused haemodialysis facilities make it difficult to balance the budget • Commercially provided satellite or main unit HD facilities have a vested interest in keeping patients on satellite or main unit HD • PbR provides financial incentives for RRT over Maximal Conservative Care

  29. Equity of renal care • Same opportunity to benefit from healthcare irrespective of • Ethnic origin • Cultural origin • Literacy • Income • Educational status • Social class • Language • Geography

  30. Socioeconomic factors in RRT acceptance rate PCTs with higher deprivation scores have higher RRT acceptance rates PCTs with higher ethnic minority populations have higher RRT acceptance rates in England, but not in Wales After adjustment for deprivation and ethnicity, acceptance rate ratio remains significantly higher in Wales, and lower in NW England and Yorkshire/Humberside Udayaraj U et al. J Epid Comm Health 2010;64:535

  31. Socioeconomic status and access to transplant waiting list Adjusted for age, gender, PRD, year of start; and for centre effect N= 9602 - White patients only Udayaraj U et al. Transplantation 2010; 90: 279-285

  32. Centre variation in access to renal transplantation – longitudinal study • Objective – to assess whether there is equity in access to renal transplantation in the UK after adjustment for case mix • Incident patients in 65 centres submitting data to UKRR between 1/03 and 12/05, followed until 12/08 (excluding pts >65y, pts activated and then immediately suspended, patients listed for multi-organ Tp) • Proportion of incident patients at each centre registered on waiting list, time taken to registration, and proportion subsequently transplanted

  33. Ravanan R et al. BMJ 2010; 341: c3451

  34. Patient experience in renal care • No validated PROMs for chronic conditions • Several validated QoL measures, none routinely collected or reported • No validated measures of satisfaction with OP consultations

  35. Trust in OP medical care 417 patients attending new patient OPA with cardiologist, neurologist, nephrologist, gastroenterologist, rheumatologist Keating NL. Arch Intern Med 2004; 164: 1015-1020

  36. Summary so far • 7 dimensions of quality • Room for improvement in each • But how?

  37. Translating research into care Original research variable Submission 0.5 years Negative results Acceptance 0.6 years Publication 0.3 years Lack of numbers Bibliographic databases 6-13 years Review, paper, textbook Inconsistent indexing 9.3 years Implementation Balas EA, Boren SA. Managing clinical knowledge for health care improvement. Yrbk of Med Informatics 2000; 65-70

  38. Clinical research to clinical practice: lost in translation? • US life expectancy lower than 22 other countries despite $250bn NIH investment since 1950 • lack of improvement due to failure to translate the findings of clinical investigations into the practice of medicine at the community level • from the translational highway to the smaller avenues and lanes of the microsystems that deliver care Lenfant C. Shattuck Lecture. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 868

  39. QI: implementation science • Establish the need for improvement • Establish a measure • Agree a SMART aim • Find a change package • From the literature • From high performing centres • Do multiple PDSA cycles

  40. Understanding high performance • Structure + Process = Outcome • Learning from high-performing units requires • Identifying them reliably • Finding out how they achieve their results • A detailed understanding of HOW care is delivered, as well as WHAT care is delivered, is critically important for understanding how different centres achieve different results

  41. Collecting information on causes of centre variation • Anecdote • Ask the high performers • But they won’t have any idea how their practice differs from ‘poor’ performers • Ask people who’ve worked elsewhere – e.g. rotation SpRs!! • Design a questionnaire – Delphi technique • Administer a questionnaire

  42. Thank you Charlie.tomson@nbt.nhs.uk

More Related