Risk-adjus men model in heal h ou comes
e alua ion: a con ibu ion o s eng hen
assessmen owa ds quali y imp o emen
in in e en ional ca diology
PAULO SOUSA1,2, ANTO
´NIO SOUSA UVA1AND FAUSTO PINTO3ON BEHALF OF THE
INVESTIGATORS OF PCI REGISTRY OF PORTUGUESE SOCIETY OF CARDIOLOGY
1
Na ional School o Public Heal h, New Uni e si y o Lisbon, Lisbon, Po ugal,
2
School o Heal h Technologies o Lisbon, Lisbon,
Po ugal, and
3
Facul y o Medicine, Uni e si y o Lisbon, Lisbon, Po ugal
Abs ac
Objec i e. The aim o his s udy was o de elop a isk adjus men model o majo ad e se ca diac and ce eb o ascula
e en s ollowing pe cu aneous co ona y in e en ion (PCI), using da a om a na ional egis y, and o highligh he use o he
isk adjus men when we e alua e he quali y o ca e in in e en ional ca diology.
Design. The s udy design was based on a Coo e s udy. Bi a ia e and mul i a ia e logis ic eg ession models we e used o
iden i y independen isk ac o s o hese majo ad e se e en s.
Se ing. A o al o 19 hospi als om he Po uguese Na ional Regis y o In e en ional Ca diology.
Pa icipan s. Da a om 10.641 consecu i es p ocedu es collec ed be ween June 30, 2003 and June 30, 2006.
In e en ion. Build a isk adjus men model o hese majo ad e se e en s, ollowing pe cu aneous co ona y in e en ion.
Main Ou come Measu e. Fac o s ha we e associa ed wi h majo ad e se ca diac and ce eb o ascula e en s ollowing
pe cu aneous co ona y in e en ion.
Resul s. The a e o in-hospi al majo ad e se ca diac and ce eb o ascula e en s was 1.9%. Fac o s associa ed wi h majo
ad e se ca diac and ce eb o ascula e en s included, among o he s: age .80 yea s (adjus ed odds a io ¼3.91); emale
gende (1.72); and ca diogenic shock (6.05). O e all, a good disc imina ion was achie ed wi h ecei e ope a ing cha ac e is ics
cu e ¼0.84 and Hosme -Lemeshow goodness o fi s a is ic ac oss g oups o isk was no significan (P¼0.18) indica ing
li le depa u e om a pe ec fi .
Conclusions. These findings will ep esen an impo an con ibu ion o quali y and sa e y imp o emen and should help
d i ing new esea ch and inno a i e app oaches o di e en subg oups o pa ien s who ha e highe chances o ha ing an
ad e se e en o poo e ou comes ollowing his in e en ion.
Keywo ds: isk adjus men , PCI, quali y imp o emen , sa e y, ou comes esea ch
In oduc ion
The g owing emphasis and in e es in Quali y a e ela i ely
ecen phenomena in heal h sys ems. In ac , i is a cu en
heme ha has become pa icula ly impo an in he agendas
and he policies o many coun ies all o e he wo ld [1, 2].
The concep o quali y in heal h is nowadays seen om
di e en iewpoin s and is defined in di e en ways. The e
a e se e al models o assess quali y o ca e, each one wi h
di e en dimensions and app oaches. The mos ly used wo ld-
wide is he model defined, some yea s ago, by Donabedian,
based on h ee dimensions: s uc u e, p ocess and ou comes
[3]. In he las yea s, pa icula ly in he Uni ed S a es o
Ame ica, Canada, Aus alia, and some Eu opean coun ies,
he emphasis is inc easingly on ou comes e alua ion [4, 5].
The es ablishmen o quali y s anda ds based on pa ien
ou come da a is a a ional means o di e en ia ing he quali y
o heal h ca e in he ma ke place. Howe e , a ia ion in pa ien ’s
Add ess ep in eques s o: Paulo Sousa, School o Heal h Technologies o Lisbon, Lisbon, Po ugal. Tel: þ351 8980423;
Fax: þ351 7221392; E-mail: [email p o ec ed]
In e na ional Jou nal o Quali y in Heal h Ca e ol. 20 no. 5
#The Au ho 2008. Published by Ox o d Uni e si y P ess in associa ion wi h he In e na ional Socie y o Quali y in Heal h Ca e;
all igh s ese ed 324
In e na ional Jou nal o Quali y in Heal h Ca e 2008; Volume 20, Numbe 5: pp. 324–330 10.1093/in qhc/mzn029
Ad ance Access Publica ion: 11 July 2008
Downloaded om h ps://academic.oup.com/in qhc/a icle-abs ac /20/5/324/1795212 by gues on 14 No embe 2018
baseline clinical isks p ecludes he di ec compa ison o ou -
comes ac oss ope a o s, ins i u ions and heal h ca e plans.
Mo eo e , acco ding o Iezzoni [6], meaning ul compa ison
wi hin he heal h ca e sys em, gene ally equi es isk adjus men
– accoun ing o pa ien associa ed ac o s be o e compa ing
ou comes ac oss di e en pa ien s, ea men s, p o ide s, heal h
plans, o popula ions. The a ionale is ob ious; on an a e age
highe - isk pa ien s ypically gene a e la ge cos s, and pe sons
wi h complex illnesses, mul iple coexis ing diseases, o o he
significan isk ac o s, gene ally de elop mo e complica ions
and ha e poo e ou comes, e en wi h excellen ca e.
The e ha e been se e al a emp s, in ecen yea s, pa icula ly
in he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica and Eu ope, o inco po a e
isk-adjus men me hodology in he e alua ion o pe cu aneous
co ona y in e en ion (PCI) ou comes [7–10]. These a emp s
ha e been limi ed by small sample sizes, pa ien samples ha do
no eflec con empo a y PCI, limi ed geog aphic ep esen-
a ion, inconsis en defini ions and coding o he a iables,
poo quali y o he da a used o build hese models, and conse-
quen ly, by he lack o applied da a s anda ds.
In 2002, he Po uguese Socie y o Ca diology launched
he na ional egis y on in e en ional ca diology, no a man-
da o y egis y like in Sweden, wi h he aim o ob ain know-
ledge abou he p ofile o he pa ien , pa e ns o disease
and ea men s a egies; o assess adhe ence o guidelines o
ca dio ascula disease in clinical p ac ice; and o s imula e
clinical esea ch in his impo an a ea [11].
Since 2005, he Po uguese egis y uses he Eu o Hea
Su ey on PCI pla o m, which ein o ce mo e he quali y o
da a [since i uses he Ca diology Audi and Regis a ion
Da a S anda ds sys em (CARDS)] and ha e opened a window
o u u e compa isons among Eu opean coun ies, which
used simila da a [12].
Me hods
S udy popula ion
Re ospec i e analysis o p ospec i e collec ed da a om 10 641
consecu i e pa ien s who unde wen PCI, in a o al o 19
Po uguese cen es who pa icipa ed in he Po uguese PCI
egis y, be ween June 30, 2003 and June 30, 2006.
As a majo ad e se e en , o he pu pose o his s udy,
we conside ed a composi e a iable comp ising, dea h, acu e
myoca dial in a c ion, need o a new e ascula iza ion by
u gen co ona y a e y bypass g a , and s oke.
We conside ed as independen a iables hose ha cha ac-
e ize he indi iduals and ea men aspec s, namely demo-
g aphic (e.g. age, gende ); clinical aspec s (e.g. diabe es,
hype ension, pe iphe al disease) and echnical and unc ional
aspec s (e.g. numbe o essels diseased, lesion ype, ejec ion
ac ion, defined as no mal .50%; sligh ly educed 41–50%;
mode a ely educed 31–40%; se e ely educed ,30%).
Da a collec ion
The da a we e collec ed om he PCI da abase o he
na ional cen e o da a collec ion in ca diology, he s uc u e
o he Po uguese Socie y o Ca diology, which is esponsible
o he Po uguese egis y. The Po uguese da abase is based
on he Eu o Hea Su ey o he Eu opean Socie y o
Ca diology. Da a collec ion me hods and defini ion o he
a iables ollow he policy o CARDS sys em o Eu opean
Socie y o Ca diology. The o m, o each p ocedu e, is filled
in a web pla o m and he quali y con ol o he da a and
audi is done by Eu opean Socie y o Ca diology. A e ha ,
he da a a e sen o he Po uguese na ional cen e and hen
dis ibu ed o each pa icipan cen es. Da a a e also a ailable
in he webpage o he Eu opean Socie y o Ca diology.
S a is ical analysis
Fi s ly, we ha e s a ed wi h a desc ip i e analysis wi h he
aim o ge knowledge abou he popula ion pa e ns wi h
espec o each a iable.
Subsequen ly, a bi a ia e analysis was done c ossing he
independen ( hose who cha ac e ize he indi iduals and
ea men aspec s) wi h he dependen a iable, wi h he aim
o iden i ying hose ha ha e he s onges s a is ical associ-
a ion wi h majo ad e se ca diac and ce eb o ascula e en s.
To build he model, and o iden i y independen isk
ac o s o majo ad e se ca diac and ce eb o ascula e en s,
a mul i a ia e logis ic eg ession analysis was unde aken,
using he s epwise o wa d echnique, which includes all
a iables ha showed, in he bi a ia e analysis, an odds a io
.1 (which indica es a posi i e associa ion o he occu ence
o majo ad e se ca diac and ce eb o ascula e en s), and
we e s a is ically significan (wi h P- alue ,0.05).
To assess he pe o mance and calib a ion o he model,
he a ea unde he ecei e ope a ing cha ac e is ics (ROC)
cu e and he Hosme –Lemeshow goodness o fi s a is ic
we e calcula ed.
All s a is ical analysis we e conduc ed using he S a is ical
p og amwSPSS 14, o a le el o significance o 0.05
(P¼0.05) and a confidence in e al (CI) o 95%. The
associa ion measu e used was he odds a io.
Resul s
In he 10 641 pa ien s who unde wen PCI, and we e
included in he egis e , he p ima y success a e was 98.1%
and he a e o in-hospi al majo ad e se ca diac and ce e-
b o ascula e en s was 1.9%. In hese, 1.4% was dea h; 0.4%
de eloped an acu e myoca dial in a c ion; 0.2% had a s oke;
and 0.1% eme gency co ona y a e y bypass g a . These
a es a e no mu ually exclusi e, which means ha in some
pa ien s occu ed mo e han one majo ad e se e en .
The fi s s ep o he model de elopmen was o examine
he bi a ia e ela ionship be ween majo ad e se ca diac and
ce eb o ascula e en s and each p e-p ocedu al isk ac o
(Table 1). In he mul i a ia e logis ic eg ession model we
included all he a iables ha showed, in he bi a ia e analy-
sis, an odds a io .1 and we e s a is ically significan (wi h
P- alue ,0.05), such as age, gende , acu e myoca dial in a c-
ion, ca diogenic shock, conges i e hea ailu e, diabe es,
pe iphe al disease, enal ailu e (c ea inine .2.0 mg/dl),
Risk-adjus men model in heal h ou comes e alua ion
325
Downloaded om h ps://academic.oup.com/in qhc/a icle-abs ac /20/5/324/1795212 by gues on 14 No embe 2018
.............................................................................................................................................................................
Table 1 Uni a ia e and bi a ia e analysis be ween dependen and independen a iables
Va iable % o pa ien s
(n¼10 641)
% o majo
ad e se e en s
Odds a io
(95% CI)
P- alue
Age ,50 yea s 13.7 1.0 Re e ence
Age 50–59 yea s 23.4 1.4 1.44 (0.75–2.75) 0.21
Age 60–69 yea s 30.8 1.4 1.51 (0.81–2.81) 0.20
Age 70–79 yea s 26.5 2.4 2.53 (1.39–4.61) 0.002
Age .80 yea s 5.6 7.1 7.85 (4.16–14.82) ,0.001
Gende
Male 24.9 1.6 1.79 (1.32–2.41) ,0.001
Female 75.1 2.9
Acu e myoca dial in a c ion
No 82.0 0.9 7.39 (5.50–9.91) ,0.001
Yes 18.0 6.6
Ca diogenic shock
No 99.1 1.5 62.46 (39.40–97.79) ,0.001
Yes 0.9 48.9
Myoca dial in a c ion an eceden s
No 65.4 2.0 0.81 (0.59–1.11) 0.19
Yes 34.6 1.7
Conges i e hea ailu e
No 95.1 1.8 7.39 (5.50–9.91) ,0.001
Yes 4.9 3.8
P io co ona y a e y bypass g a
No 95.2 1.9 1.23 (0.67–2.29) 0.51
Yes 4.8 2.3
P io pe cu aneous co ona y in e en ion
No 84.6 1.9 0.87 (0.58–1.33) 0.53
Yes 15.4 1.7
P io ce eb o ascula disease
No 97.1 1.9 1.70 (0.86–3.36) 0.12
Yes 2.9 3.1
Hype ension
No 36.2 1.8 1.07 (0.79–1.44) 0.68
Yes 63.8 1.9
Diabe es
No 74.7 1.7 1.42 (1.04–1.93) 0.03
Yes 25.3 2.4
Pe iphe al disease
No 97.1 1.8 2.96 (1.72–5.08) ,0.001
Yes 2.9 5.2
Renal ailu e
No 98.0 1.8 3.86 (2.16–6.91) ,0.001
Yes 2.0 6.6
Ejec ion ac ion (no mal) 71.9 1.0 Re e ence
Ejec ion ac ion sligh ly educed 18.2 1.5 1.55 (0.98–2.47) 0.06
Ejec ion ac ion mode a ely educed 6.2 2.7 2.78 (1.57–4.90) ,0.001
Ejec ion ac ion se e ely educed 3.7 10.1 11.43 (7.43–17.61) ,0.001
One essel disease 50.6 1.3 Re e ence
Two essels disease 31.3 1.9 1.40 (0.98–2.01) 0.06
Th ee o mo e essels diseases 18.1 3.8 2.91 (2.06–4.11) ,0.001
In a-ao ic balloon pump
No 99.3 1.7 42.39 (25.18–71.24) ,0.001
Yes 0.7 42.2
(con inued )
P. Sousa e al.
326
Downloaded om h ps://academic.oup.com/in qhc/a icle-abs ac /20/5/324/1795212 by gues on 14 No embe 2018
ejec ion ac ion, numbe o diseased essels, in a-ao ic
balloon pump, ype o lesion, non-s en ing, p io i y o p o-
cedu e and le main ea ed.
In Table 2 we can see he a iables ha esul ed om he
mul i a ia e logis ic eg ession analysis, using he s epwise
o wa d echnique, wi h hei espec i e coe ficien , odds
a io, significance alue and CI.
O e all, a good disc imina ion was achie ed wi h ROC
cu e ¼0.84 (Fig. 1), and a Hosme –Lemeshow goodness o
fi s a is ic ac oss g oups o isk was no significan (P¼0.18),
indica ing li le depa u e om a pe ec fi .
Discussion
In oday’s wo ld, he apid sp ead o in o ma ion, g owing
le el o knowledge and g ea e equi emen s o pa ien s,
s ong financial cons ain s, inc easing call o accoun abili y,
and he need o in oduce c i e ia and quali y indica o s in
he heal h ca e p o ided, ha e con ibu ed o some change in
he dynamics o heal h ins i u ions [13, 14]
These dynamics ha e e ol ed in he di ec ion o gi ing
g ea e alue o he collec ion and ea men o c edible s an-
da dized da a which makes possible he e alua ion and
moni o o se ices ega ding he olume o ac i i y and he
quali y o esul s achie ed [15].
The final goal o isk adjus men is o accoun o pe i-
nen pa ien cha ac e is ics be o e making in e ence abou
he e ec i eness o ca e.
In he ecen pas we ha e seen g ea p og ess in PCI
ha has led o a widening ange o si ua ions wi h well-
es ablished clinical and angiog aphic indica ions [16–18].
Howe e , PCI s ill ca ies significan isk, especially in
subg oups in which a mo e complex clinical condi ion may
lead o highe ad e se e en a es.
In Po ugal, he numbe o p ocedu es and cen es whe e
PCI is pe o med has exponen ially inc eased in he pas
decade, om 3017 in e en ions (302 pe million inhabi an s)
in 12 cen es, in 1997 [19] o an es ima ion o abou 11 500
(1150 pe million inhabi an s) in 24 cen es, in 2006.
Wi h his apid inc ease in he numbe o p ocedu es and
cen es which pe o m PCI in Po ugal, which is simila o
he end o o he Eu opean coun ies, and since he e is a
na ional con inuous egis y, i would be impo an o build a
isk-adjus men model. This could g ea ly help o do eliable
compa isons o esul s among ins i u ions, egions o popu-
la ions, con ibu ing o he de elopmen o mul icen e
s udies, and es ablishing c edible and igo ous benchma king
alues in he coun y.
In o ma ion ob ained om egis ies is inc easingly being
used o assess he p ocess o ca e and pa ien ou comes, sup-
po ed by he pa adigm ha he u u e o heal hca e is
inc easingly in he hands o hose who a e e ec i e use s o
clinical da a [20].
Mo eo e , his b ings up ano he impo an ques ion ha
Po ugal and all Eu opean coun ies mus ace in he sho
e m – which is he need o eliable and s anda dized da a
sys ems o collec , sys ema ize and analyse da a which could
help o moni o he heal h ca e sys em ei he , pa ially o as
a whole. Fo hese ha e concu ed di e en easons such as:
(i) s ong mo emen s o accoun abili y and p essing o
ou come da a, due o he ac ha he consume s o oday
a e mo e in o med and demanding han e e , and call o a
desc ip ion o he ecommended ea men and i s ad an-
ages and isks [21]; (ii) legal ques ions, he example o
Uni ed Kingdom, since he in oduc ion o eedom o
.............................................................................................................................................................................
Table 1 Con inued
Va iable % o pa ien s
(n¼10 641)
% o majo
ad e se e en s
Odds a io
(95% CI)
P- alue
Lesion ype A (Ame ican College o
Ca diology classifica ion)
7.7 0.9 Re e ence
Lesion ype B 60.0 1.4 1.45 (0.67–3.16) 0.35
Lesion ype C 32.3 3.2 3.55 (1.64–7.67) ,0.001
Non-s en ing
No 94.0 1.6 4.43 (3.09–6.34) ,0.001
Yes 6.0 6.7
Le main ea ed
No 99 1.8 6.00 (3.07–11.73) ,0.001
Yes 1.0 10.1
PCI in g a lesions
No 98.6 1.9 1.15 (0.36–3.63) 0.75
Yes 1.4 2.2
P io i y o p ocedu e (u gen /eme gen )
No 72.0 0.8 6.70 (4.89–9.19) ,0.001
Yes 28.0 5.0
Risk-adjus men model in heal h ou comes e alua ion
327
Downloaded om h ps://academic.oup.com/in qhc/a icle-abs ac /20/5/324/1795212 by gues on 14 No embe 2018
in o ma ion ac , ha became manda o y he indi idual dis-
closu e in o ma ion abou he su geons esul s, in di e en
a eas [9]. We belie e ha any a emp o p oduce unadjus ed
ou come analysis and compa isons, by named ope a o , o
ins i u ions, may be misleading and will he e o e encou age
ad e se selec ion p ac ices, and will jeopa dize he ela ion-
ship be ween pa ien s and heal h ca e p o essionals; (iii)
economic implica ions, which poin ou no only he impo -
ance o e ec i eness bu also he e ficiency o he heal h
ca e deli e ed [22].
I is well known ha he absence o guidelines o da a
collec ion and clea defini ions o da a i ems a e e y impo -
an causes o da a e o s in medical egis ies, making i
di ficul o de elop mul icen e s udies and also hampe ing
he compa isons o esul s be ween di e en egions and
coun ies [12, 15].
By de eloping and using da a s anda ds, based on he
CARDS sys em, he Eu o Hea Su ey and all egis ies ha
use hei pla o m, a e hese ques ions and ha e g ea ly
expanded he pool o pa ien s and geog aphical a ea in
which da a ou comes can be analysed and compa ed [12].
Fu he mo e his emphasizes he impo ance o heal h
ou come analysis, based on c edible, s anda dized and
audi ed da a, as a cen al poin in a quali y assu ance p o-
g amme and also as a key pa hway in he di ec ion o edu-
cing he bu den o ca dio ascula disease in Eu ope.[23, 24].
Bea ing in mind ha ca dio ascula disease, including co -
ona y a e y disease, a ec s millions o pa ien s wo ldwide,
wi h se ious consequences in economic and social weigh ,
e alua ion o he esul s o PCI using c edible in o ma ion
and sys ema ic da abases is c ucial o he achie emen o
he g ea e objec i e which is o gua an ee and imp o e he
quali y o heal h ca e p o ided [17, 21, 24]. The e o e he
use o isk adjus men in ou comes e alua ion o PCI is
essen ial o assess di e en quali y dimensions such as e ec-
i eness, e ficiency and sa e y [23, 25, 26].
The e a e mul iple a eas whe e he isk-adjus men me hod-
ology can be used o con ibu e o s eng hen he quali y
assessmen and by his means each he quali y imp o emen ,
including he ollowing: o de ec po en ial ad e se selec ion
(based on he se e i y o he disease); o iden i y and define, in
a mo e igo ous way, quali y indica o s; o quali y assessmen
pu poses, p o iding a compa ison o ou comes among p o i-
de s (hospi als o physicians) a e adjus ing o isk and asses-
sing changes in isk-adjus ed ou comes o a single p o ide
o e ime; and o help explain and unde s and he impac o
p ac ice a ia ions among p o ide s, and hei implica ion in
di e en clinical and economic ou comes [6, 27].
The isk-adjus men model de eloped in his s udy, by
allowing he iden ifica ion and e alua ion o pa ien isk
ac o s ha a e associa ed wi h poo ou comes o ad e se
e en s, cons i u es a po en ial con ibu ion o quali y imp o e-
men in in e en ional ca diology. Howe e , i needs o be
es ed in u u e p ospec i e s udies.
Gene ally, he models o isk adjus men a e buil based on
clinical da a. Howe e , i will be impo an , in he u u e, o
....................................................................................
Table 2 Independen isk ac o s o majo ad e se ca diac
and ce eb o ascula e en s
Va iable Coe ficien Adjus ed OR
(95% CI)
P- alue
Age ,50 yea s 0.03 1.03 (0.47–2.29) 0.94
Age 50–59 yea s 0.09 1.10 (0.51–2.35) 0.81
Age 60–69 yea s 0.56 1.75 (0.84–3.64) 0.13
Age 70–79 yea s 1.36 3.91 (1.74–8.77) 0.001
Gende ( emale) 0.54 1.72 (1.13–2.61) 0.01
Acu e myoca dial
in a c ion
0.99 2.68 (1.46–4.93) 0.001
Ca diogenic shock 1.80 6.05 (2.44–15.01) ,0.001
Renal ailu e 1.09 2.98 (1.28–6.97) 0.01
Ejec ion ac ion
sligh ly educed
20.01 0.99 (0.59–1.64) 0.96
Ejec ion ac ion
mode a ely
educed
0.16 1.17 (0.60–2.27) 0.64
Ejec ion ac ion
se e ely impai ed
1.37 3.94 (2.22–7.01) ,0.001
Two essels
disease
0.26 1.30 (0.81–2.09) 0.29
Th ee o mo e
essels diseases
0.78 2.18 (1.35–3.51) 0.001
Lesion ype B 0.48 1.62 (0.49–5.33) 0.43
Lesion ype C 0.96 2.60 (0.79–8.61) 0.12
In a-ao ic
balloon pump
1.44 4.21 (1.53–11.56) 0.005
Non-s en ing 1.07 2.92 (1.72–4.96) ,0.001
P io i y o
p ocedu e
(u gen /eme gen )
0.74 2.11 (1.13–3.91) 0.02
Cons an 26.63 – –
Figu e 1 A ea unde he ecei e ope a ing cha ac e is ics
(ROC) cu e o mul i a ia e p edic ion model
P. Sousa e al.
328
Downloaded om h ps://academic.oup.com/in qhc/a icle-abs ac /20/5/324/1795212 by gues on 14 No embe 2018

include also economic da a (cos s pe pa ien and pe p ocedu e,
o c oss-da a om diagnos ic- ela ed g oups, o ins ance) wi h
he aim o close he gap be ween e ec i eness and e ficacy and,
a he same ime, o ob ain a global and in eg a ed pe spec i e
o he quali y o heal h ca e deli e ed [26, 28].
The cu en s udy has con ibu ed o demons a e he
po en ial alue o using a con inuous na ional da abase, wi h
imely da a analysis, o de eloping a isk-adjus men model
o majo ad e se ca diac and ce eb o ascula e en s.
Pe haps he mos significan limi a ion o he cu en s udy
is he lack o a sys ema ic app oach o audi ing he da a. In
ou opinion, one o he bigge challenges o he u u e is he
need o submi all da abases o a alid and objec i e audi
p ocess, in o de o gua an ee he quali y o he da a.
Wi h he p oli e a ion o e o s o epo publicly he ou -
comes o heal hca e p o ide s and ins i u ions, mos o hem
using isk-adjus men models, he e was a g owing need o
define s anda ds o he me hods ha a e being employed.
Acco ding o his, he in e disciplina y w i ing g oup o
quali y o ca e and ou comes esea ch o he Ame ican Hea
Associa ion iden ified, ecen ly, se en p e e ed a ibu es o
s a is ical models used [20].
I is ou belie ha his s udy includes all o he se en
a ibu es, namely, clea and explici defini ion o an app o-
p ia e pa ien sample; clinical cohe ence o he model a i-
ables; su ficien ly high-quali y and imely da a; designa ion o
an app op ia e e e ence ime be o e which co a ia es a e
de i ed and a e which ou comes a e measu ed; use o an
adequa e ou come and s anda dized pe iod o ou come
assessmen ; applica ion o an analy ical app oach ha akes
in o accoun he mul ile el o ganiza ion o da a; and disclos-
u e o he me hods used o compa e ou comes, including
disclosu e o pe o mance o he isk-adjus men me hod-
ology in de i a ion and alida ion samples.
Ne e heless, he a iables ha we e gene a ed om ou
model a e consis en wi h a numbe o o he s udies ecen ly
published [8, 9, 18, 29].
Conclusions
The isk-adjus men model de eloped in his s udy, by allow-
ing he iden ifica ion and e alua ion o pa ien isk ac o s
ha a e associa ed wi h poo ou comes o ad e se e en s
ep esen a po en ial con ibu ion o imp o e quali y o ca e
h ough a mo e igo ous assessmen o ou comes.
The a iables ha we e gene a ed om ou model a e
consis en wi h a numbe o o he s udies ecen ly published.
These findings will likely ep esen a po en ial con ibu ion
o imp o e quali y and should help d i ing new esea ch and
inno a i e app oaches o di e en subg oups o pa ien s who
ha e highe chances o ha ing an ad e se e en o poo e
ou comes ollowing PCI.
Despi e he exis ence o models al eady desc ibed in he
li e a u e, o ou knowledge he e is none based on da a
om Eu o Hea Su ey da abase. This could be seen as an
e o o imp o e quali y in a e y ele an public heal h
bu den disease, such as co ona y a e y disease.
In ou opinion, his issue will be in ensified in he yea s
ahead and should be s udied mo e deeply because, on an
a e age, he occu ence o ad e se e en s o poo esul s is
linked wi h an inc ease in financial and social cos s.
De eloping isk-adjus men models o majo ad e se
ca diac and ce eb o ascula e en s ollowing PCI is an
impo an pa o he quali y and sa e y imp o emen
p ocess o ca diac e ascula iza ion p ocedu es, and o
es ablishing c edible and igo ous benchma king alues.
Acknowledgemen s
We hank P o . Lino Gonc¸al es, head o he Na ional Cen e
o Da a Collec ion in Ca diology and he Po uguese Socie y
o Ca diology o au ho izing he use o he da a o his
s udy, as well as he cen es ha con ibu ed o he egis y,
namely, Hospi al de Sa
˜oJoa
˜o; Hospi al Ge al de San o
An o´nio; Cen o Hospi ala de Vila No a de Gaia; Hospi al
de Sa
˜o Teo o´nio; Hospi ais da Uni e sidade de Coimb a;
Cen o Hospi ala de Coimb a; Hospi al Cu y Cab al;
Hospi al Pulido Valen e; Hospi al de San a C uz; Hospi al de
San a Ma a; Hospi al Ga cia de O a; Hospi al de Sa
˜o
Be na do; Hospi al Dis i al de Fa o; Hospi al do Di ino
Espı
´ i o San o (Pon a Delgada); Cen o Hospi ala do
Funchal; Hospi al da C uz Ve melha; Hospi al da CUF;
Hospi al do SAMS; Se ic¸o Me´dico de Imagem
Compu o izada (SCIMC).
Re e ences
1. Pe e sen S, Pe o V, Rayne M e al.Eu opean Ca dio ascula
Disease S a is ic. London: B i ish Hea Founda ion, 2005.
2. La sson B, La sson G, Chan e eau M e al. In e na ional com-
pa ison o pa ien ’s iew on quali y o ca e. In J Heal h Ca e
Assu 2005;18:66–73.
3. Donabedian A. La Calidad De La A encio
´nMe
´dica.Me´xico DF:
La P ensa Mexicana, 1984.
4. Shaughnessy PW, Hi le DF. O e iew o Risk Adjus men and
Ou comes Measu es o Home Heal h Agency OBQI Repo s: Highligh s
o Cu en App oaches and Ou line o Planned Enhancemen s. Den e :
Cen e o Heal h Se ices Resea ch, UCHSC, 2002.
5. A ca M, Fusco D, Ba one AP e al. Risk adjus men and
ou come esea ch. J Ca diol Med 2006;7:682–90.
6. Iezzoni L. Reasons o isk adjus men . In: Iezzoni L (ed). Risk
Adjus men o Measu ing Heal hca e Ou comes, 3 d edn, 2003.
7. Mayna d C, Richa d JG, Malenka DJ e al. Adjus ing o pa ien
di e ences in p edic ing hospi al mo ali y o pe cu aneous
co ona y in e en ions in he Clinical Ou comes Assessmen
P og am. Am Hea J 2003;145:658–64.
8. Shaw RE, Ande son HV, B indis RG e al. De elopmen o a
isk adjus men mo ali y model using he Ame ican College
o Ca diology – Na ional Ca dio ascula Da a Regis y
(ACC-NCDR) Expe ience: 1998–2000. J Am Coll Ca diol
2002;39:1104–12.
Risk-adjus men model in heal h ou comes e alua ion
329
Downloaded om h ps://academic.oup.com/in qhc/a icle-abs ac /20/5/324/1795212 by gues on 14 No embe 2018
9. G ayson AD, Mo e RK, Jackson M e al. No hwes quali y
imp o emen p og amme in ca diac in e en ions. Mul i a ia e
p edic ion o majo ad e se ca diac e en s a e 9914 pe cu a-
neous co ona y in e en ions in he no h wes o England.
Hea 2006;92:658–63.
10. Singh M, Rihal CS, Lennon RJ e al. A c i ical app aisal o
cu en models o isk s a ifica ion o pe cu aneous co ona y
in e en ion. Am Hea J 2005;149:753–60.
11. Pe ei a H. on behal o he in es iga o s o PCI egis y o
he Po uguese Socie y o Ca diology. Regis o Po ugue
ˆsde
Ca diologia de In e enc¸a
˜o. Re Po Ca diol 2004;23:7–14.
12. Flynn MR, Ba e C, Cosio FG e al. The ca diology audi and
egis a ion da a s anda ds (CARDS), Eu opean da a s anda ds
o clinical ca diology p ac ice. Eu o Hea J 2005;26:308–13.
13. Wo ld Heal h O ganiza ion. Measu ing Hospi al Pe o mance o
Imp o e he Quali y o Ca e in Eu ope: A Need o Cla i ying he
Concep s and Defining he Main Dimensions. Ba celona: WHO
Regional O fice o Eu ope, 2003.
14. Fe gunson TB, J , Pe e son ED, Coombs LP e al. Use o
con inuous quali y imp o emen o inc ease use o p ocess
measu es in pa ien s unde going co ona y a e y bypass g a
su ge y: a andomised con olled ial. JAMA 2003;290:49–56.
15. Wein aub WS, McKay CR, Rine R e al. The Ame ican
College o Ca diology Na ional Da abase: p og ess and chal-
lenges. J Am Coll Ca diol 1997;29:459–65.
16. Topol EJ. Quali y o ca e in in e en ional ca diology. In: Topol
EJ (eds). Tex book o In e en ional Ca diology, 4 h edn.
Philadelphia: Saunde s, 2003, 1021–32.
17. Ande son HV, Shaw RE, B indis RG. A con empo a y o e -
iew o pe cu aneous co ona y in e en ion. J Am Coll Ca diol
2002;39:1096–103.
18. Chun ao W, Hannan EL, Wal o d G e al. A isk sco e o
p edic in-hospi al mo ali y o pe cu aneous co ona y in e -
en ions. J Am Coll Ca diol 2006;47:654–60.
19. Maie W, Camici P, Windecke D e al. The Eu opean Regis y
o Ca diac Ca he e In e en ion 1997, on behal o he
Wo king G oup Co ona y Ci cula ion o he Eu opean Socie y
o Ca diology. Eu Hea J 2002;23:1903–07.
20. K umholz HM, B indis RG, B ush JE e al. S anda ds o s a -
is ical models used o public epo ing o heal h ou comes.
Ci cula ion 2006;113:456–62.
21. Ma shall MN, Shekelle PG, Huw TO e al. Public epo ing on
quali y in he Uni ed S a es and he Uni ed Kingdom. Heal h
A 2003;22:134–48.
22. Jacobson KM, Long KH, McMu y EK e al. The economic
bu den o complica ions du ing pe cu aneous co ona y in e -
en ion. Qual Sa Heal h Ca e 2007;16:154–9.
23. Schol e OP, Reime WJW, Gi AK e al. (eds). Ca dio ascula
Diseases in Eu ope. Eu o Hea Su ey 2006. Sophia An ipolis:
Eu opean Socie y o Ca diology, 2006.
24. B indis RG, Fi zge ald S, Ande son HV e al. The Ame ican
College o Ca diology – Na ional Ca dio ascula Da a Regis y:
building a na ional clinical da a eposi o y. J Am Coll Ca diol
2001;37:2240–45.
25. Leal J, Luego-Fe na´ndez R, G ay A e al. Economic bu den o
ca dio ascula disease in he enla ged Eu opean Union. Eu
Hea J 2006;27:1610–19.
26. Ins i u e o Medicine. C ossing he Quali y Chasm: A New Heal h
Sys em o he 21s Cen u y. Washing on, D.C.: Na ional Academy
P ess, 2001.
27. Fe a is AI, Edwa ds FH, Shahian DM e al. Risk s a ifica ion
and como bdi y. In: Cohn LH (ed). Ca diac Su ge y in he Adul .
New Yo k: McG aw-Hill, 2008, 199–246.
28. Kugelmass AD, Cohen DJ, B ow PB e al. Hospi al esou ces
consumed in ea ing complica ions associa ed wi h pe cu a-
neous co ona y in e en ions. Am J Ca diol 2006;97:322–27.
29. Block PC, Pe e son EC, K one R e al. Iden ifica ion o a i-
ables needed o isk adjus ou comes o co ona y in e en ion:
e idence-based guidelines o e ficien da a collec ion. J Am Coll
Ca diol 1998;32:275–82.
Accep ed o publica ion 18 June 2008
P. Sousa e al.
330
Downloaded om h ps://academic.oup.com/in qhc/a icle-abs ac /20/5/324/1795212 by gues on 14 No embe 2018