Development of an international standard set of clinical and patient-reported outcomes for children and adults with congenital heart disease: A report from the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Congenital Heart Disease Working Group

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Hummel ◽  
Sarah Whittaker ◽  
Nick Sillett ◽  
Amy Basken ◽  
Malin Berghammer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Congenital Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Congenital Heart ◽  
Case Mix ◽  
Outcomes Measurement ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Case Mix Adjustment ◽  
Standard Set

Abstract Aims Congenital heart disease (CHD) is the most common congenital malformation. Despite the worldwide burden to patient wellbeing and health system resource utilization, tracking of long-term outcomes is lacking, limiting the delivery and measurement of high-value care. To begin transitioning to value-based healthcare in CHD, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement aligned an international collaborative of CHD experts, patient representatives, and other stakeholders to construct a standard set of outcomes and risk-adjustment variables that are meaningful to patients. Methods and results The primary aim was to identify a minimum standard set of outcomes to be used by health systems worldwide. The methodological process included four key steps: 1) develop a working group representative of all CHD stakeholders; 2) conduct extensive literature reviews to identify scope, outcomes of interest, tools used to measure outcomes, and case-mix adjustment variables; 3) create the outcome set using a series of multi-round Delphi processes; and 4) disseminate set worldwide. The WG established a 15-item outcome set, incorporating physical, mental, social, and overall health outcomes accompanied by tools for measurement and case-mix adjustment variables. Patients with any CHD diagnoses of all ages are included. Following an open review process, over 80% of patients and providers surveyed agreed with the set in its final form. Conclusion This is the first international development of a stakeholder-informed standard set of outcomes for CHD. It can serve as a first step for a lifespan outcomes measurement approach to guide benchmarking and improvement among health systems.

scholarly journals Development of an international standard set of outcome measures for patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) atrial fibrillation working group

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (10) ◽  
pp. 1132-1140 ◽  
Author(s):  
William H Seligman ◽  
Zofia Das-Gupta ◽  
Adedayo O Jobi-Odeneye ◽  
Elena Arbelo ◽  
Amitava Banerjee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Case Mix ◽  
Outcomes Measurement ◽  
International Consortium ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Icd Codes ◽  
Standard Set

Abstract Aims As health systems around the world increasingly look to measure and improve the value of care that they provide to patients, being able to measure the outcomes that matter most to patients is vital. To support the shift towards value-based health care in atrial fibrillation (AF), the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled an international Working Group (WG) of 30 volunteers, including health professionals and patient representatives to develop a standardized minimum set of outcomes for benchmarking care delivery in clinical settings. Methods and results Using an online-modified Delphi process, outcomes important to patients and health professionals were selected and categorized into (i) long-term consequences of disease outcomes, (ii) complications of treatment outcomes, and (iii) patient-reported outcomes. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, comorbidities, cognitive function, date of diagnosis, disease duration, medications prescribed and AF procedures, as well as smoking, body mass index (BMI), alcohol intake, and physical activity. Where appropriate, and for ease of implementation, standardization of outcomes and case-mix variables was achieved using ICD codes. The standard set underwent an open review process in which over 80% of patients surveyed agreed with the outcomes captured by the standard set. Conclusion Implementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of chronic AF care. Their consistent definition and collection, using ICD codes where applicable, could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research in AF.

Abstract 16774: Adverse Childhood Experiences Reported by Adults With Congenital Heart Disease

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marshall A Taunton ◽  
Sheldon Levy ◽  
Adrienne H Kovacs ◽  
Abigail M Khan
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Congenital Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Adverse Childhood Experiences ◽  
Congenital Heart ◽  
Childhood Experiences ◽  
Adverse Childhood ◽  
The Impact

Introduction: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), such as witnessing domestic abuse or experiencing physical/sexual abuse, are associated with poorer long-term health outcomes, including acquired cardiovascular disease. This study offers the first investigation of ACEs in adults with congenital heart disease (CHD). Methods: In this cross-sectional study, adult CHD outpatients completed the ACE Questionnaire, the Relationship Scales Questionnaire, the Perceived Stress Scale, and a 0 - 100 linear analogue scale of quality of life. Total scores on the ACE Questionnaire range from 0 - 10 (a point for each ACE reported) and scores ≥ 4 are associated with poorest health outcomes. We performed correlations, t-tests, and analyses of variance to explore relationships between ACE Questionnaire scores and demographics, medical variables, and other survey scores. Results: A total of 100 patients were enrolled in the study (40 ± 13 years; 60% female). Ninety percent had defects of moderate or great complexity and 79% were categorized as American Heart Association anatomy + physiology stage B, C or D (i.e., some degree of symptoms and/or functional impairment). Total scores on the ACE Questionnaire ranged from 0 - 9, with a mean of 2.6 ± 2.5; 30% reported ≥ 4 ACEs. The most frequently reported ACEs were parental divorce (46%), emotional abuse (42%), and parental substance abuse problem (32%). ACE Questionnaire scores did not differ as a function of age, sex, defect complexity, or anatomy + physiology stage. However, total ACE score was significantly correlated with all 4 relationship styles (secure, preoccupied, dismissive and fearful; p-values < 0.05). Quality of life scores were lower among those with elevated ACEs, although this did not reach statistical significance (69 vs. 76, p = 0.07). Conclusion: It is well accepted that adults with CHD face many health-related challenges throughout their lives. This study serves as an important reminder to providers that many patients will also experience other significant (and potentially traumatic) stressors in childhood. Further research is needed to determine whether the impact of ACEs on adults with CHD extends beyond relationship and stress outcomes and also includes cardiac morbidity and mortality.

Analysis of outcomes for congenital cardiac disease: can we do better?

2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (S4) ◽  
pp. 145-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey P. Jacobs ◽  
Gil Wernovsky ◽  
Martin J. Elliott
Keyword(s):  
Congenital Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Thoracic Surgery ◽  
Working Group ◽  
European Association ◽  
Congenital Heart ◽  
Heart Surgery ◽  
Congenital Heart Surgery ◽  
European Paediatric

AbstractThis review discusses the historical aspects, current state of the art, and potential future advances in the areas of nomenclature and databases for the analysis of outcomes of treatments for patients with congenitally malformed hearts. We will consider the current state of analysis of outcomes, lay out some principles which might make it possible to achieve life-long monitoring and follow-up using our databases, and describe the next steps those involved in the care of these patients need to take in order to achieve these objectives. In order to perform meaningful multi-institutional analyses, we suggest that any database must incorporate the following six essential elements: use of a common language and nomenclature, use of an established uniform core dataset for collection of information, incorporation of a mechanism of evaluating case complexity, availability of a mechanism to assure and verify the completeness and accuracy of the data collected, collaboration between medical and surgical subspecialties, and standardised protocols for life-long follow-up. During the 1990s, both The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons created databases to assess the outcomes of congenital cardiac surgery. Beginning in 1998, these two organizations collaborated to create the International Congenital Heart Surgery Nomenclature and Database Project. By 2000, a common nomenclature, along with a common core minimal dataset, were adopted by The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and published in the Annals of Thoracic Surgery. In 2000, The International Nomenclature Committee for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease was established. This committee eventually evolved into the International Society for Nomenclature of Paediatric and Congenital Heart Disease. The working component of this international nomenclature society has been The International Working Group for Mapping and Coding of Nomenclatures for Paediatric and Congenital Heart Disease, also known as the Nomenclature Working Group. By 2005, the Nomenclature Working Group crossmapped the nomenclature of the International Congenital Heart Surgery Nomenclature and Database Project of The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons with the European Paediatric Cardiac Code of the Association for European Paediatric Cardiology, and therefore created the International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code, which is available for free download from the internet at [http://www.IPCCC.NET].This common nomenclature, the International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code, and the common minimum database data set created by the International Congenital Heart Surgery Nomenclature and Database Project, are now utilized by both The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Between 1998 and 2007 inclusive, this nomenclature and database was used by both these two organizations to analyze outcomes of over 100,000 patients undergoing surgical treatment for congenital cardiac disease. Two major multi-institutional efforts that have attempted to measure the complexity of congenital heart surgery are the Risk Adjustment in Congenital Heart Surgery-1 system, and the Aristotle Complexity Score. Current efforts to unify the Risk Adjustment in Congenital Heart Surgery-1 system and the Aristotle Complexity Score are in their early stages, but encouraging. Collaborative efforts involving The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons are under way to develop mechanisms to verify the completeness and accuracy of the data in the databases. Under the leadership of The MultiSocietal Database Committee for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease, further collaborative efforts are ongoing between paediatric and congenital cardiac surgeons and other subspecialties, including paediatric cardiac anaesthesiologists, via The Congenital Cardiac Anesthesia Society, paediatric cardiac intensivists, via The Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care Society, and paediatric cardiologists, via the Joint Council on Congenital Heart Disease and The Association for European Paediatric Cardiology.In finalising our review, we emphasise that analysis of outcomes must move beyond mortality, and encompass longer term follow-up, including cardiac and non cardiac morbidities, and importantly, those morbidities impacting health related quality of life. Methodologies must be implemented in these databases to allow uniform, protocol driven, and meaningful, long term follow-up.

scholarly journals Report of the Pediatric Heart Network and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working Group on the Perioperative Management of Congenital Heart Disease

Circulation ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 121 (25) ◽  
pp. 2766-2772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan R. Kaltman ◽  
Dean B. Andropoulos ◽  
Paul A. Checchia ◽  
J. William Gaynor ◽  
Timothy M. Hoffman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Congenital Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Congenital Heart ◽  
Perioperative Management ◽  
Blood Institute ◽  
National Heart ◽  
National Heart Lung

Nomenclature and databases for the surgical treatment of congenital cardiac disease – an updated primer and an analysis of opportunities for improvement

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (S2) ◽  
pp. 38-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Phillip Jacobs ◽  
Marshall Lewis Jacobs ◽  
Constantine Mavroudis ◽  
Carl Lewis Backer ◽  
Francois G. Lacour-Gayet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Congenital Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Thoracic Surgery ◽  
Working Group ◽  
European Association ◽  
Congenital Heart ◽  
Heart Surgery ◽  
Congenital Heart Surgery ◽  
European Paediatric

AbstractThis review discusses the historical aspects, current state of the art, and potential future advances in the areas of nomenclature and databases for the analysis of outcomes of treatments for patients with congenitally malformed hearts. We will consider the current state of analysis of outcomes, lay out some principles which might make it possible to achieve life-long monitoring and follow-up using our databases, and describe the next steps those involved in the care of these patients need to take in order to achieve these objectives. In order to perform meaningful multi-institutional analyses, we suggest that any database must incorporate the following six essential elements: use of a common language and nomenclature, use of an established uniform core dataset for collection of information, incorporation of a mechanism of evaluating case complexity, availability of a mechanism to assure and verify the completeness and accuracy of the data collected, collaboration between medical and surgical subspecialties, and standardised protocols for life-long follow-up.During the 1990s, both The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons created databases to assess the outcomes of congenital cardiac surgery. Beginning in 1998, these two organizations collaborated to create the International Congenital Heart Surgery Nomenclature and Database Project. By 2000, a common nomenclature, along with a common core minimal dataset, were adopted by The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and published in the Annals of Thoracic Surgery. In 2000, The International Nomenclature Committee for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease was established. This committee eventually evolved into the International Society for Nomenclature of Paediatric and Congenital Heart Disease. The working component of this international nomenclature society has been The International Working Group for Mapping and Coding of Nomenclatures for Paediatric and Congenital Heart Disease, also known as the Nomenclature Working Group. By 2005, the Nomenclature Working Group crossmapped the nomenclature of the International Congenital Heart Surgery Nomenclature and Database Project of The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons with the European Paediatric Cardiac Code of the Association for European Paediatric Cardiology, and therefore created the International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code, which is available for free download from the internet at [http://www.IPCCC.NET].This common nomenclature, the International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code, and the common minimum database data set created by the International Congenital Heart Surgery Nomenclature and Database Project, are now utilized by both The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Between 1998 and 2007 inclusive, this nomenclature and database was used by both of these two organizations to analyze outcomes of over 150,000 operations involving patients undergoing surgical treatment for congenital cardiac disease.Two major multi-institutional efforts that have attempted to measure the complexity of congenital heart surgery are the Risk Adjustment in Congenital Heart Surgery-1 system, and the Aristotle Complexity Score. Current efforts to unify the Risk Adjustment in Congenital Heart Surgery-1 system and the Aristotle Complexity Score are in their early stages, but encouraging. Collaborative efforts involving The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons are under way to develop mechanisms to verify the completeness and accuracy of the data in the databases. Under the leadership of The MultiSocietal Database Committee for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease, further collaborative efforts are ongoing between congenital and paediatric cardiac surgeons and other subspecialties, including paediatric cardiac anaesthesiologists, via The Congenital Cardiac Anesthesia Society, paediatric cardiac intensivists, via The Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care Society, and paediatric cardiologists, via the Joint Council on Congenital Heart Disease and The Association for European Paediatric Cardiology.In finalising our review, we emphasise that analysis of outcomes must move beyond mortality, and encompass longer term follow-up, including cardiac and non cardiac morbidities, and importantly, those morbidities impacting health related quality of life. Methodologies must be implemented in these databases to allow uniform, protocol driven, and meaningful, long term follow-up.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document