Scientific Publications Database

Article Title: Quality indicators for the diagnosis and management of chronic rhinosinusitis
Authors: Cottrell, Justin; Yip, Jonathan; Chan, Yvonne; Chin, Christopher J.; Damji, Ali; de Almeida, John R.; Desrosiers, Martin; Janjua, Arif; Kilty, Shaun; Lee, John M.; Macdonald, Kristian, I; Meen, Eric K.; Rudmik, Luke; Sommer, Doron D.; Sowerby, Leigh; Tewfik, Marc A.; Vescan, Allan D.; Witterick, Ian J.; Wright, Erin; Monteiro, Eric
Journal: INTERNATIONAL FORUM OF ALLERGY & RHINOLOGY Volume 8 Issue 12
Date of Publication:2018
Abstract:
Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) has been identified as a high-priority disease category for quality improvement. To this end, this study aimed to develop CRS-specific quality indicators (Qls) to evaluate diagnosis and management that relieves patient discomfort, improves quality of life, and prevents complications.Methods: A guideline-based approach, proposed in 2012 by Kotter et al. was used to develop Qls for CRS. Candidate indicators (Cls) were extracted from 3 practice guidelines and 1 international consensus statement on the diagnosis and management of CRS. Guidelines were evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool. Each CI and its supporting evidence was summarized and reviewed by an expert panel based on validity, reliability, and feasibility of measurement. Final Qls were selected from CIs utilizing the modified RAND Corporation-University of California, Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) appropriateness methodology.Results: Thirty-nine CIs were identified after literature review and evaluated by our panel. Of these, 9 Cls reached consensus as being appropriate Qls, with 4 requiring additional discussion. After a second round of evaluations, the panel selected 9 Qls as appropriate measures of high-quality care.Conclusion: This study proposes 9 Qls for the diagnosis and management of patients with CRS. These Qls can serve multiple purposes, including documenting the quality of care ; comparing institutions and providers ; prioritizing quality improvement initiatives ; supporting accountability, regulation, and accreditation; and determining pay-for-performance initiatives. (C) 2018 ARS-AAOA, LLC.