IntroductionStroke is a major contributor to mortality, disability and long-term use of healthcare services. As for all chrono-dependant conditions, clinical results are associated with timely access to appropriate care. Thrombectomy (EVT) is an effective treatment for large vessel occlusions, but can only be provided in highly-specialized centers by experienced personnel. We sought to develop a framework to aid decision-making on the appropriateness of opening new EVT centers in Québec, Canada.MethodsData sources included provincial administrative healthcare databases, population density statistics, field evaluation of Québec's four existing EVT care networks, and literature review concerning structural and performance criteria for EVT centers. We consulted EVT clinical teams, interdisciplinary stroke experts, patients, professional association representatives, healthcare managers and decision-makers.ResultsAccess to EVT is suboptimal in all 17 regions of Québec, with virtually no access in remote areas. Results of key performance indicators indicated favorable treatment delays after arrival at the EVT center. However, door-to-needle and door-in-door-out times were long for patients transferred from non-EVT centers. High use of ambulances indicated the potential to transport patients to the most appropriate center. In light of ‘real world’ results and other sources of information, the need for a new EVT center should consider the following criteria: sub-optimal EVT access within the region; transport time to an existing EVT center >1 hour; expected patient volume within 2 hours of transport; impact on volume of existing programs; availability of long-term financial support; availability of a critical mass of neurointerventionists, vascular neurologists, and neurosurgeons; demonstrated quality of stroke care; and, presence of a stroke unit.ConclusionsThe triangulation of literature, clinician experience and the Québec context enriched the evaluation process. Furthermore, this facilitated the development of a framework that was broadly applicable across regions to the real-world setting of decision-making in a complex system of care.
Introduction:Decision-making about replacement or modification of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) must be patient-centered and clinically appropriate. We engaged both patients and health care professionals in a multi-method approach in order to recommend structures and processes that facilitate informed and shared decision-making.Methods:A systematic literature review (2000 to 2017) was performed focusing on the patient's perspective and the optimal organization of structures and processes for decision-making. A province-wide field evaluation based on medical chart review was carried out to provide ‘real world’ evidence in Québec's six ICD implanting centers (1 July to 31 December, 2016; N = 418). Patients and health care professionals reviewed the findings of the review and field evaluation, and deliberated recommendations in an anonymous manner by electronic mail. A joint meeting focused on proposed recommendations concerning shared decision-making.Results:The patients provided feedback on the literature review based on their ICD experience, and highlighted the need for better and more interactive decision aids, clinical information and time, and a private space for sensitive discussions. The field evaluation underlined the variability of treatment choices at the time of replacement and that more than one in ten patients had undergone ICD deactivation. Proposed recommendations focus on multi-disciplinary, integrated follow-up of patients and outline best practice for incorporating patient wishes and life objectives when discussing treatment options. The multi-round consultation process allowed both patients and professionals to co-construct recommendations with our evaluation team.Conclusions:This multi-method approach enriched our interpretation of literature and ‘real world’ data and facilitated identification and prioritization of important themes. Partnership with both patients and clinicians added a new and energizing dynamic to our evaluation and recommendation processes. We acknowledge the contribution of the members of the patient committee and the clinical experts committee.
INTRODUCTION:Our cardiovascular evaluation unit is mandated to evaluate transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in the province of Québec. In 2012, it was recommended that only patients at too high risk for surgery receive TAVI. In partnership with our six hospital TAVI programs, we have measured indicators of structure, process and outcomes since 2013. We are collaborating with multidisciplinary clinical experts to update recommendations for optimal use. Herein, we present the evolving portrait of TAVI in Québec and identify priority issues.METHODS:Clinical data were collected and analyzed for all TAVI performed from 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2016. Regular site feedback was provided. A systematic review of recent guidelines and randomized trials facilitated the interpretation of “real world” results and formulation of provincial quality standards.RESULTS:Provincial TAVI volume increased from 294 in 2013–14 to 340 in 2014–15, and to 360 in 2015–16. Patient age and sex distribution remained relatively constant over time (median age 83 years; 47 percent female). However, the median predicted risk of operative mortality (STS score) decreased in the latest period [6 percent (Interquartile Range, IQR: 4–9) versus 7 percent (IQR: 4–9) versus 4 percent (IQR: 3–7)], suggesting TAVI is increasingly being performed in lower-risk patients. Clinical documentation and processes of care generally improved. Thirty-day mortality decreased (6.1 percent versus 4.1 percent versus 2.8 percent). The literature review identified two central issues: TAVI futility in patients who are too sick and apparent non-inferiority of TAVI compared with surgical valve replacement in medium-risk patients.CONCLUSIONS:Our province-wide TAVI evaluation indicates improving processes and outcomes. Patient selection remains the key in our universal healthcare system, with the need to minimize futile and costly therapy and offer TAVI to those most likely to benefit. Continued monitoring of clinical practice and newly-established quality standards, in close collaboration with clinical teams, remains essential to promote optimal use of this evolving technology.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.