-
Clinical Audit
-
About Dovepress
Open access peer-reviewed scientific and medical journals.
-
Open Access
Dove Medical Press is now a member of the Open Access Initiative
-
An Author's Guide
A guide to help authors get their paper published.
-
Advocacy
Support Open Access and Dove Press
-
Reprints
Promotional Article Monitoring - further details
-
Favored Author Program
Real benefits for authors, including fast-track processing of papers.
Identification of a reliable subset of process indicators for clinical audit in stroke care: an example from Australia
Methodology
(2036) Views (405) Full article downloads
Authors: Dominique A Cadilhac, Monique Kilkenny, Leonid Churilov, et al
Published Date July 2010
Volume 2010:2 Pages 67 - 77
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CA.S7094
Dominique A Cadilhac1,2, Monique Kilkenny1,2, Leonid Churilov1,2, Dawn Harris3, Erin Lalor3, on behalf of the National Stroke Foundation1National Stroke Research Institute, Heidelberg Heights 3081, Vic, Australia; 2Department of Medicine, The University of Melbourne 3010, Australia; 3National Stroke Foundation, Melbourne 3000, Australia
Abstract: In 2007, the National Stroke Foundation (Australia) conducted the first national audit of acute inpatient services for stroke with >30 indicators. Routine collection of many variables can be a burden for clinicians, and methods to identify practical subsets are needed.
Purpose: To identify a subset of indicators to facilitate meaningful longitudinal comparisons, and to reliably represent the full suite of indicators.
Methods: 3-steps were taken:
1) Value-based judgments to establish a subset were made by the National Advisory Committee (of the National Stroke Foundation) given: level of evidence, clinical relevance, consumer importance, and ability for international comparisons
2) Statistical analyses were used to identify subsets that could predict patient outcome and total process score
3) Comparisons of steps 1 and 2: logistic regression and estimation of agreement using intraclass correlation coefficient and Lin’s concordance coefficient.
Results: Value-based judgments resulted in 14 indicators being selected; parametric methods identified 12. Six indicators were consistently selected: stroke unit care; aspirin, physiotherapy assessment, and speech pathology assessment within 48 hours; a care plan; and antihypertensive medication at discharge. The scoring method based on the value-based indicator subset demonstrated excellent agreement with total process scores of hospitals.
Conclusion: Selection of an indicator subset requires consideration of several factors. Indicators selected by experts were robust.
Keywords: stroke, processes of care, performance, acute care, Australia
Other articles by Dr Dominique Cadilhac
Readers of this article also read:
National Stroke Audit: The Australian experience
An audit of orthopedic operation notes: what are we missing?
Dashboards in neonatology
Recycling the surgical audit
An audit on the management of patients with acute shoulder dislocation
An audit of informed consent for cesarean section and instrumental delivery in a tertiary referral center in the United Kingdom
Changes in hospital performance after implementation of pay-for-performance in Japan
- Testimonials
"... I was impressed at the rapidity of publication from submission to final acceptance." Dr Edwin Thrower, PhD, Yale University
- Health literacy and health seeking behavior among older men in a middle-income nation
- Increasing access to quality health care for the poor: Community perceptions on quality care in Uganda
- Prolonged rupture of membranes in term infants: should all babies be screened?
- Narcissistic rage: The Achilles’ heel of the patient with chronic physical illness




