Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
National Cataract Audit
National Cataract Audit
Why?
• Quality assure NHS services Show surgeons / centres their results
Learn from the best
Eliminate poor practice
Use scale to reduce personal burden of audit on individuals
Risk adjust to avoid penalising surgeons who take on difficult cases
Cataract Audit participation
Looking ahead – 114 of 125 NHS Centres signed up
4
2018 Report
• Surgeon and Centre results on NOD website
– 1918 Surgeons invited to check their latest results
• 92 Centres being reported
– Majority Medisoft
– 4 OpenEyes
– 7 Other
• 181,965 Operations
6
Is all this really worth the effort?
PCR % RATE 2010-11* 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Overall
N = 64,923 N = 82,879 N = 89,602 N = 100,333 N = 107,255 N = 148,073 N = 182,064 N = 775,129
Consultant surgeons
(485,757) 1.55 1.48 1.46 1.33 1.27 1.18 1.10 1.28
Career grade surgeons
(88,272) 1.82 1.64 1.78 1.25 1.69 1.29 1.54 1.55
More experienced
trainee surgeons
(171,458)
2.87 2.65 2.41 2.33 2.21 2.17 1.95 2.29
Less experienced
trainee surgeons
(29,642)
3.66 3.62 3.02 2.35 2.57 2.53 2.33 2.71
Overall 2.00 1.85 1.77 1.56 1.56 1.46 1.38 1.59
Overall 30% reduction in PCR rate from 2010-11 to 2016-17 *Years run from Sept to August
Data Validation and Data Completeness Overview and Data Entry
Professor John Sparrow,
Consultant Ophthalmologist and NOD Audit Clinical Lead
Data Completeness
• Number of cases reported – Recent joiners acknowledged as such in report (date)
– Comparison between submitted data and NHS digital (pro-rata)
• Complications – 100% PCR or some other complication or none
• VA Pre- & Post-op – Variable between centres
• Risk indicators data – PCR
– VA Loss (doubling or worse of visual angle)
– Important for case complexity adjustment
Number of Cases and Estimated % Completeness
Data from 2015-2016 Report https://www.nodaudit.org.uk/
Data Completeness
Number of cases reported – Recent joiners acknowledged as such in report (date)
– Comparison between submitted data and NHS digital (pro-rata)
• Complications – 100% PCR or some other complication or none
• VA Pre- & Post-op – Variable between centres
• Risk indicators data – PCR
– VA Loss (doubling or worse of visual angle)
– Important for case complexity adjustment
Data Completeness
Number of cases reported – Recent joiners acknowledged as such in report (date)
– Comparison between submitted data and NHS digital (pro-rata)
Complications – 100% PCR or some other complication or none
• VA Pre- & Post-op – Variable between centres
• Risk indicators data – PCR
– VA Loss (doubling or worse of visual angle)
– Important for case complexity adjustment
% Cases with Missing Pre-op VA by Centre
% Cases with Missing Post-op VA by Centre
Data Completeness
Number of cases reported – Recent joiners acknowledged as such in report (date)
– Comparison between submitted data and NHS digital (pro-rata)
Complications – 100% PCR or some other complication or none
VA Pre- & Post-op – Variable between centres
• Risk indicators data – PCR
– VA Loss (doubling or worse of visual angle)
– Important for case complexity adjustment
Data Completeness
Number of cases reported – Recent joiners acknowledged as such in report (date)
– Comparison between submitted data and NHS digital (pro-rata)
Complications – 100% PCR or some other complication or none
VA Pre- & Post-op – Variable between centres
• Risk indicators data – PCR
– VA Loss (doubling or worse of visual angle)
– Important for case complexity adjustment
% Cases with Specific Ocular Pathologies
% Cases with Ocular Pathology
Data Completeness
Number of cases reported – Recent joiners acknowledged as such in report (date)
– Comparison between submitted data and NHS digital (pro-rata)
Complications – 100% PCR or some other complication or none
VA Pre- & Post-op – Variable between centres
Risk indicators data – PCR
– VA Loss (doubling or worse of visual angle)
– Important for case complexity adjustment
Data Validation
• Contributors invited to check
– Number of cases reported
– Adverse outcomes
• PCR
• VA Loss (needs both Pre & Post-op VA)
– Risk indicators data
• For case complexity adjustment
Known
Number cases done % PCRs
Unadjusted data 4503 2.07% 93
Benchmark = 1.10%
Adjusted% = 1.25%
Adjusted% = Benchmark * ObservedN / ExpectedN
ExpectedN (from case complexity) is unknown
ExpectedN = Benchmark * ObservedN / Adjusted% PCRs
ExpectedN = 82
ObservedN is higher than expectedN, therefore
adjusted rate of 1.25% is higher than benchmark of 1.10%
Conclusion:
Centre's recorded case complexity is overall less complex
than the average complexity from all centres
Case Complexity Centre Example
Known
Number cases done % PCRs
Unadjusted data 606 1.65% 10
Benchmark = 1.10%
Adjusted% = 0.92%
Adjusted% = Benchmark * ObservedN / ExpectedN
ExpectedN (from case complexity) is unknown
ExpectedN = Benchmark * ObservedN / Adjusted% PCRs
ExpectedN = 12
ObservedN is lower than expectedN, therefore
adjusted rate of 0.92% is lower than benchmark of 1.10%
Conclusion:
Surgeon's recorded case complexity is overall more complex
than the average complexity from all surgeons
Case Complexity Surgeon Example
Data Completeness
Number of cases reported – Recent joiners acknowledged as such in report (date)
– Comparison between submitted data and NHS digital (pro-rata)
Complications – 100% PCR or some other complication or none
VA Pre- & Post-op – Variable between centres
Risk indicators data – PCR
– VA Loss (doubling or worse of visual angle)
– Important for case complexity adjustment