Improving quality through clinical registries in urology

Abstract

Purpose of review In this review, we highlight the use of clinical registries for quality improvement and research purposes in urology. We focus on national and regional clinical database registries, such as the the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE), the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Initiative (MUSIC), and the American Urological Association Quality Registry (AQUA) program. Recent Findings It is widely known that claims-based and institutional databases are limited in their capacity to provide granular, real-time data for quality improvement purposes. As a result, clinical registries have emerged as an attractive alternative given their ability to capture large amounts of data across networks of health records. Another added benefit of Federally Qualified Clinical Data Registries (QCDRs) is the ability to meet emerging Medicare quality reporting standards, such as Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) and Meaningful Use (MU). Despite the enthusiasm for QCDRs in the field of urology, however, myriad challenges remain in their implementation and widespread adoption including integration of existing health-information technology infrastructure, the accurate measurement of quality measures, and the availability of clinically relevant quality measures in sub-specialty practices. Summary Quality measurement and improvement have become important aspects of modern clinical practice. Advances in health information technology have ushered in new tools, such as clinical registries, that simultaneously improve the quality of scientific research and clinical care while assisting eligible professionals in meeting federally mandated reporting requirements.

Development of a core data set for pelvic floor disorder patients registry

“…Therefore, it is very important to pay attention to systematically collected quality data for improving the quality of health care. Considering the emerging progress in health information technology, the data set as a basis can be utilized by a web‐based patient registry system toward simultaneously improving the quality of scientific research and clinical care and developing the evidence‐based programs for PFDs management 25 . If the PFDs registry can facilitate the collection of meaningful quality outcome data it can ultimately inform clinicians of their outcomes related to a number of cases, post‐operative visits, and essential surgical complications.…”

Big Data Analytics in urology: the story so far and the road ahead

“…While both automated and manual (by paid registrars) data abstraction costs a lot, the former is susceptible to inaccuracies as well. 48 Nonetheless, clinical registries though are recent developments and are likely to play crucial roles in quality improvement and yield studies that will hold a large share of urologic literature given their advantages over AD. 48 …”

The past, present, and future of urological quality improvement collaboratives

“…At present, data abstraction using trained abstractors is proving to be labor-intensive with a relatively high cost burden. Automated EMR scrubbing, as employed by AQUA, may be more cost-effective but can introduce data inaccuracies (52). Further refinement of techniques for automated data abstraction should improve the accuracy of abstracted data while requiring less manpower than is needed for manual data abstraction.…”