Benchmarks for low back pain in general practice in Flanders: electronic audit of INTEGO.

IF 2.6 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL BMC primary care Pub Date : 2024-12-20 DOI:10.1186/s12875-024-02644-6
Rico Paridaens, Bert Vaes, Steve Van den Bulck, Justine Soetaert
{"title":"Benchmarks for low back pain in general practice in Flanders: electronic audit of INTEGO.","authors":"Rico Paridaens, Bert Vaes, Steve Van den Bulck, Justine Soetaert","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02644-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most frequent reasons for encounter in general practice. Yet results from literature show adherence to clinical practice guidelines is low. Audit & feedback is a well-known strategy to improve adherence to guidelines. Benchmarking is an important step in the audit & feedback process. The objective of this study was to develop data-derived benchmarks for low back pain quality indicators.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Four electronic health record extractable quality indicators were selected from an existing indicator set developed by CEBAM, an independent, multidisciplinary and interuniversity medical scientific institute in Belgium. Data from 2021-2022 from INTEGO, a general practice morbidity registry, were used to calculate benchmarks for the four quality indicators. The Achievable Benchmark of Care methodology was used to create benchmarks based on the performance of the 10% best-performing practices.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The following benchmarks were derived: 4.2% prescription for medical imaging, 12.7% prescription for opioids, 27.2% for prescription for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetaminophen, 37.7% prescription for physical therapy and 11.9% prescription for work absenteeism.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Benchmarks for four electronic health record-extractable quality indicators have been established. They can be used for an electronic audit & feedback tool in primary practice in Flanders or other quality improvement initiatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"25 1","pages":"431"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11660715/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02644-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most frequent reasons for encounter in general practice. Yet results from literature show adherence to clinical practice guidelines is low. Audit & feedback is a well-known strategy to improve adherence to guidelines. Benchmarking is an important step in the audit & feedback process. The objective of this study was to develop data-derived benchmarks for low back pain quality indicators.

Methods: Four electronic health record extractable quality indicators were selected from an existing indicator set developed by CEBAM, an independent, multidisciplinary and interuniversity medical scientific institute in Belgium. Data from 2021-2022 from INTEGO, a general practice morbidity registry, were used to calculate benchmarks for the four quality indicators. The Achievable Benchmark of Care methodology was used to create benchmarks based on the performance of the 10% best-performing practices.

Results: The following benchmarks were derived: 4.2% prescription for medical imaging, 12.7% prescription for opioids, 27.2% for prescription for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetaminophen, 37.7% prescription for physical therapy and 11.9% prescription for work absenteeism.

Conclusions: Benchmarks for four electronic health record-extractable quality indicators have been established. They can be used for an electronic audit & feedback tool in primary practice in Flanders or other quality improvement initiatives.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在佛兰德斯的一般实践中腰痛的基准:INTEGO的电子审计。
背景:腰痛(LBP)是在一般实践中遇到的最常见的原因之一。然而,文献结果显示,临床实践指南的依从性很低。审计和反馈是一个众所周知的策略,以提高遵守指导方针。标杆管理是审计和反馈过程中重要的一步。本研究的目的是建立基于数据的腰痛质量指标的基准。方法:从比利时独立、多学科和大学间医学研究所CEBAM开发的现有指标集中选择了四个电子健康记录可提取的质量指标。来自INTEGO(全科医生发病率登记处)2021-2022年的数据用于计算四项质量指标的基准。采用可实现的护理基准方法,根据10%最佳实践的表现创建基准。结果:得出以下基准:医学影像学处方4.2%,阿片类药物处方12.7%,非甾体类抗炎药或对乙酰氨基酚处方27.2%,物理治疗处方37.7%,旷工处方11.9%。结论:建立了四项电子病历可提取质量指标的基准。它们可用于法兰德斯初级实践或其他质量改进计划中的电子审计和反馈工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Correction: Does social concordance matter? Healthcare activities before familial hypercholesterolemia diagnosis: a nationwide register-based study in Denmark. Exploring entrepreneurship among general practitioners: a scoping review of education and practice. The ongoing quest for the independent patient: an interview study on healthcare professionals' perspectives on integrating self-monitoring of blood pressure in hypertension care. Scaling up an integrated primary mental health screening programme in South Africa through co-development and continuous quality improvement.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1