Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32377798›Full record

ArticleDer Anaesthesist2021

Implementation of anesthesia quality indicators in Germany : A prospective, national, multicenter quality improvement study.

S Ziemann, M Coburn, R Rossaint, J Van Waesberghe, H Bürkle, M Fries, M Henrich, D Henzler, T Iber, J Karst and 11 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Anaesthesist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Consensus quality indicators for monitoring multiple sclerosis.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2024
    Review
  2. Postoperative Weight Gain within Enhanced Recovery after Cardiac Surgery.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023
    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

21 authors.

S ZiemannDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.
M CoburnDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany. mcoburn@ukaachen.de.
R RossaintDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.
J Van WaesbergheDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.
H BürkleDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
M FriesDepartment of Anaesthesiology, St. Vincenz Hospital Limburg, Limburg, Germany.
M HenrichDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, St.-Vincentius Hospital Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany.
D HenzlerDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Surgical Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, Klinikum Herford, Ruhr-University Bochum, Herford, Germany.
T IberDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Klinikum Mittelbaden, Baden-Baden, Germany.
J KarstOutpatient Anaesthesia Care Centre Karst, Berlin, Germany.
O KunitzDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Klinikum Mutterhaus der Borromäerinnen, Trier, Germany.
R LöbDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Critical Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, St. Barbara Hospital, Hamm, Germany.
W MeißnerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany.
P MeybohmDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
B MierkeDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Hospital St. Elisabeth, Damme, Germany.
F PabstDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, University Hospital Rostock, Rostock, Germany.
G SchaelteDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.
J SchiffDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Surgical Intensive Care Medicine, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
M SoehleDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
M WinterhalterDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Klinikum Bremen-Mitte, Bremen, Germany.
A KowarkDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2016 the German Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI) and the Association of German Anesthetists (BDA) published 10 quality indicators (QI) to compare and improve the quality of anesthesia care in Germany. So far, there is no evidence for the feasibility of implementation of these QI in hospitals.

objectiveThis study tested the hypothesis that the implementation of the 10 QI is feasible in German hospitals. MATERIAL AND

methodsThis prospective three-phase national multicenter quality improvement study was conducted in 15 German hospitals and 1 outpatient anesthesia center from March 2017 to February 2018. The trial consisted of an initial evaluation of pre-existing structures and processes by the heads of the participating anesthesia departments, followed by a 6-month implementation phase of the QI as well as a final re-evaluation phase. The implementation procedure was supported by web-based implementation aids ( www.qi-an.org ) and internal quality management programs. The primary endpoint was the difference in the number of implemented QI per center before and after implementation. Secondary endpoints were the number of newly implemented QI per center, the overall number of successful implementations of each QI, the identification of problems during the implementation as well as the kind of impediments preventing the QI implementation.

resultsThe average number of implemented QI increased from 5.8 to 6.8 (mean of the differences 1.1 ± 1.3; P < 0.01). Most frequently the QI perioperative morbidity and mortality report (5 centers) and the QI temperature management (4 centers) could be implemented. After the implementation phase, the QI incidence management and patient blood management were implemented in all 16 centers. Implementation of other quality indicators failed mainly due to a lack of time and lack of structural resources.

conclusionIn this study the implementation of QI was proven to be mostly feasible in the participating German hospitals. Although several QI could be implemented with minor effort, more time, financial and structural resources would be required for some QI, such as the QI postoperative visit.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaAnesthesiologyGermanyHumansProspective StudiesQuality ImprovementQuality Indicators, Health CareAnaesthesiaBenchmarkingQuality assuranceQuality indicatorsQuality of Healthcare

Identifiers

PMID32377798
PMCPMC8674175

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.