Publication:
Community Assessment of COPD Health Care (COACH) study: a clinical audit on primary care performance variability in COPD care.

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2018-07-03

Authors

Abad-Arranz, María
Moran-Rodríguez, Ana
Mascarós Balaguer, Enrique
Quintana Velasco, Carmen
Abad Polo, Laura
Núñez Palomo, Sara
Gonzálvez Rey, Jaime
Fernández Vargas, Ana María
Hidalgo Requena, Antonio
Helguera Quevedo, Jose Manuel

Advisors

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Metrics
Google Scholar
Export

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Abstract

A thorough evaluation of the adequacy of clinical practice in a designated health care setting and temporal context is key for clinical care improvement. This study aimed to perform a clinical audit of primary care to evaluate clinical care delivered to patients with COPD in routine clinical practice. The Community Assessment of COPD Health Care (COACH) study was an observational, multicenter, nationwide, non-interventional, retrospective, clinical audit of randomly selected primary care centers in Spain. Two different databases were built: the resources and organization database and the clinical database. From January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2016 consecutive clinical cases of COPD in each participating primary care center (PCC) were audited. For descriptive purposes, we collected data regarding the age at diagnosis of COPD and the age at audit, gender, the setting of the PCC (rural/urban), and comorbidities for each patient. Two guidelines widely and uniformly used in Spain were carefully reviewed to establish a benchmark of adequacy for the audited cases. Clinical performance was analyzed at the patient, center, and regional levels. The degree of adequacy was categorized as excellent (> 80%), good (60-80%), adequate (40-59%), inadequate (20-39%), and highly inadequate ( 80%), good (60-80%), adequate (40-59%), inadequate (20-39%), and highly inadequate ( During the study 4307 cases from 63 primary care centers in 6 regions of the country were audited. Most evaluated parameters were judged to fall in the inadequate performance category. A correct diagnosis based on previous exposure plus spirometric obstruction was made in an average of 17.6% of cases, ranging from 9.8 to 23.3% depending on the region. During the audited visit, only 67 (1.6%) patients had current post-bronchodilator obstructive spirometry; 184 (4.3%) patients had current post-bronchodilator obstructive spirometry during either the audited or initial diagnostic visit. Evaluation of dyspnea was performed in 11.1% of cases. Regarding treatment, 33.6% received no maintenance inhaled therapies (ranging from 31.3% in GOLD A to 7.0% in GOLD D). The two most frequently registered items were exacerbations in the previous year (81.4%) and influenza vaccination (87.7%). The results of this audit revealed a large variability in clinical performance across centers, which was not fully attributable to the severity of the disease.

Description

MeSH Terms

Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Clinical Audit
Female
Guideline Adherence
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Multicenter Studies as Topic
Observational Studies as Topic
Primary Health Care
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
Retrospective Studies
Spain
Spirometry

DeCS Terms

CIE Terms

Keywords

COPD, Clinical audit, Primary care, Quality of care, Variability

Citation