Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25171260›Full record

ArticleEpilepsy & behavior : E&B2014

Adherence to outpatient epilepsy quality indicators at a tertiary epilepsy center.

R Pourdeyhimi, B J Wolf, A N Simpson, G U Martz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epilepsy & behavior : E&B, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

R PourdeyhimiUniversity of Rochester Medicine, Golisano Children's Hospital, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 777R, Rochester, NY 14642, USA.
B J WolfDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, 135 Cannon St, Suite 303, MSC 835, Charleston, SC 29425-8350, USA.
A N SimpsonDepartment of Healthcare Leadership and Management, Medical University of South Carolina, 151-B Rutledge Ave, Building B, MSC 962, Charleston, SC 29425-9620, USA.
G U MartzDepartment of Neurosciences, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas St, MSC 616/CSB 301, Charleston, SC 29425-6160, USA. Electronic address: krumper4@gmail.com.

Funding

SOUTH CAROLINA CLINICAL & TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE (SCTR)UL1RR029882 · NCRR · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T. · 2009 to 2011
$10.1M
South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Institute (SCTR)UL1TR000062 · NCATS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T. · 2012 to 2014
$9.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000062NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR029882NCRR NIH HHS UL1RR029882
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionQuality indicators for the treatment of people with epilepsy were published in 2010. This is the first report of adherence to all measures in routine care of people with epilepsy at a level 4 comprehensive epilepsy center in the US.

methodsTwo hundred patients with epilepsy were randomly selected from the clinics of our comprehensive epilepsy center, and all visits during 2011 were abstracted for documentation of adherence to the eight quality indicators. Alternative measures were constructed to evaluate failure of adherence. Detailed descriptions of all equations are provided.

resultsObjective measures (EEG, imaging) showed higher adherence than counseling measures (safety). Initial visits showed higher adherence. Variations in the interpretation of the quality measure result in different adherence values. Advanced practice providers and physicians had different adherence patterns. No patient-specific patterns of adherence were seen. DISCUSSION: This is the first report of adherence to all the epilepsy quality indicators for a sample of patients during routine care in a level 4 epilepsy center in the US. Overall adherence was similar to that previously reported on similar measures. Precise definitions of adherence equations are essential for accurate measurement. Complex measures result in lower adherence. Counseling measures showed low adherence, possibly highlighting a difference between practice and documentation. Adherence to the measures as written does not guarantee high quality care.

conclusionThe current quality indicators have value in the process of improving quality of care. Future approaches may be refined to eliminate complex measures and incorporate features linked to outcomes.

Indexed as

Quality Indicators, Health CareAdultEpilepsyFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansMaleMiddle AgedTertiary Care CentersEpilepsyHealth-care reformPerformanceQuality

Identifiers

PMID25171260
PMCPMC4252657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.