OBJECTIVE: Data from the Swedish National Register in Cardiac Care have shown over the last 10 years an enduring gap between optimal treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) according to current guidelines and the treatment actually given. We performed a controlled, prospective study in order to evaluate the effects of applying a multidisciplinary team-based improvement methodology to the use of evidence-based treatments in AMI, together with the use of a modified National Quality Register. The project engaged 25% of the Swedish hospitals.

METHOD: Multidisciplinary teams from 20 hospitals participating in the National Register in Cardiac Care, ranging from small to large hospitals, were trained in continuous quality improvement methodology. Twenty matched hospitals served as controls. Our efforts were focused on finding and applying tools and methods to increase adherence to the national guidelines for 5 different treatments for AMI. For measurement, specially designed quality control charts were made available in the National Register for Cardiac Care.

RESULTS: To close the gap, an important issue for the teams was to get all 5 treatments in place. Ten of the hospitals in the study group reduced the gap in 5 of 5 treatments by 50%, while none of the control hospitals did so.

CONCLUSIONS: This first, controlled prospective study of a registry supported by multidisciplinary team-based improvement methodology showed that this approach led to rapidly improved adherence to AMI guidelines in a broad spectrum of hospitals and that National Quality Registers can be helpful tools.

BACKGROUND: Since 1996, the Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR) enabled health care providers to monitor their clinical performance over time and compare it with the national average. All health systems of Swedish county councils report data. By 2014, the NDR included data from 360 000 patients. Comparisons among county councils show significant variations in clinical outcomes and in adherence to evidence-based national guidelines. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether and how a quality improvement collaborative could influence clinical practice and outcomes.

METHODS: Twenty-three diabetes teams from all over Sweden, both primary care units and internal medicine departments, joined a quality improvement collaborative. The project was inspired by the Breakthrough Collaborative Model and lasted for 20 months. Evaluation data were collected from the teams' final reports and the NDR throughout the study period.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The teams reported improved patient outcomes significantly compared with the national average for systolic blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein levels. In contrast, glycated hemoglobin A1c levels deteriorated in the whole NDR population. Five themes of changes in practice were tested and implemented. Success factors included improved teamwork, with active use of register data, and testing new ideas and learning from others.

BACKGROUND:

Several studies show that good metabolic control is important for children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. In Sweden, there are large differences in mean haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in different hospitals and difficulties implementing national guidelines in everyday practice. This study shows how the participation in an improvement collaborative could facilitate improvements in the quality of care by paediatric diabetes teams. The Swedish paediatric diabetes quality registry, SWEDIABKIDS was used as a tool and resource for feedback and outcome measures.

METHODS:

Twelve teams at paediatric diabetes centres, caring for 30% (2302/7660) of patients in Sweden, participated in an 18-month quality improvement program. Each team defined treatment targets, areas needing improvement, and action plans. The main outcome was the centre patients' mean HbA1c levels, but other clinical variables and change concepts were also studied. Data from the previous six months were compared with the first six months after starting the program, and the long-term follow up after another eleven months.

RESULTS:

All centres reduced mean HbA1c during the second and third periods compared with the first. The mean reduction for all was 3·7 mmol/mol (p<0.001), compared with non-participating centres who improved their mean HbA1c with 1·7 mmol/mol during the same period. Many of the participating centres reduced the frequency of severe hypoglycaemia and/or ketoacidosis, and five centres reached their goal of ensuring that all patients had some sort of physical activity at least once weekly. Change concepts were, for example, improved guidelines, appointment planning, informing the patients, improving teamwork and active use of the registry, and health promotion activities.

CONCLUSIONS:

By involving paediatric diabetes teams in a quality improvement collaborative together with access to a quality register, the quality of paediatric diabetes care can improve, thereby contributing to a reduced risk of late complications for children and adolescents with diabetes.