Benchmarks for low back pain in general practice in Flanders: electronic audit of INTEGO.

Autor: Paridaens R; Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. rico.paridaens@kuleuven.be.; KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. rico.paridaens@kuleuven.be., Vaes B; KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium., Van den Bulck S; KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.; Research Group Healthcare and Ethics, UHasselt, Hasselt, Belgium., Soetaert J; KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: BMC primary care [BMC Prim Care] 2024 Dec 20; Vol. 25 (1), pp. 431. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Dec 20.
DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02644-6
Abstrakt: Background: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most frequent reasons for encounter in general practice. Yet results from literature show adherence to clinical practice guidelines is low. Audit & feedback is a well-known strategy to improve adherence to guidelines. Benchmarking is an important step in the audit & feedback process. The objective of this study was to develop data-derived benchmarks for low back pain quality indicators.
Methods: Four electronic health record extractable quality indicators were selected from an existing indicator set developed by CEBAM, an independent, multidisciplinary and interuniversity medical scientific institute in Belgium. Data from 2021-2022 from INTEGO, a general practice morbidity registry, were used to calculate benchmarks for the four quality indicators. The Achievable Benchmark of Care methodology was used to create benchmarks based on the performance of the 10% best-performing practices.
Results: The following benchmarks were derived: 4.2% prescription for medical imaging, 12.7% prescription for opioids, 27.2% for prescription for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetaminophen, 37.7% prescription for physical therapy and 11.9% prescription for work absenteeism.
Conclusions: Benchmarks for four electronic health record-extractable quality indicators have been established. They can be used for an electronic audit & feedback tool in primary practice in Flanders or other quality improvement initiatives.
Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Ethical approval was granted by the Research Ethics Committee UZ/KU Leuven (MP018709, Supplementary Material 2 and 3). All data extracted from electronic medical records of general practitioners were stored pseudonymized in the INTEGO database with strict security regulations under supervision of Healthstat, and followed national privacy legislation. INTEGO is approved by the Informatie Veligheidscomité in Belgium (IVC/KSZG/23/424, Supplementary Material 1). Patient specific data was analysed inside the Healthstat environment by the main researcher (Rico Paridaens) and only anonymised practice data was extracted for further analysis on a local computer using SPSS. There was no patient or public involvement in this study. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
(© 2024. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje