Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:29:34.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The application of a simplified system of criterions for audit to improve paediatric cardiologic and paediatric cardiac surgical care: evidence from a regional approach in Hungary

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 March 2006

Gabor Mogyorosy ,
Tunde Karacsonyi ,
Eva Szucs ,
Laszlo Kiraly ,
Tamas Kovacs  and
Andras Szatmari
Gabor Mogyorosy
Affiliation:
Department of Paediatrics, Medical and Health Science Centre, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
Tunde Karacsonyi
Affiliation:
Kenezy Gyula County Hospital, Debrecen, Hungary
Eva Szucs
Affiliation:
Paediatric Cardiology Outpatient Clinic, Debrecen, Hungary
Laszlo Kiraly
Affiliation:
Paediatric Cardiac Centre, Gottsegen Hungarian Institute of Cardiology, Budapest, Hungary
Tamas Kovacs
Affiliation:
Department of Paediatrics, Medical and Health Science Centre, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
Andras Szatmari
Affiliation:
Paediatric Cardiac Centre, Gottsegen Hungarian Institute of Cardiology, Budapest, Hungary
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aims: To evaluate the quality of cardiac and surgical care provided for children with congenital cardiac malformations in the eastern county of Hungary. Methods: We used the method of clinical audit based in selection of criterions, developing five such criterions concerning timely diagnosis, access to treatment, and outcome. To examine compliance with these criterions, we analysed retrospectively the routine data relating to children living in Hajdu-Bihar County. The period of observation lasted from January, 1994, until December, 2001, and was divided into two epochs in order to evaluate any changes over time. Results: In the first epoch, 28 infants, representing 0.1% of all newborns, died of congenital cardiac disease, with one of the malformations being recognised post mortem. In the second epoch, 21 infants died, representing 0.09% of newborns. In this group, each malformation was diagnosed before death. In each period, 6 infants died without having undergone cardiac surgery, and having no other non-cardiac disease. The overall postoperative mortality was 9.2% for the first period, and 4.6% for the second. The number of patients waiting for non-urgent repair had reduced significantly by the end of the second epoch. Conclusions: The results show that the timely diagnosis of congenital cardiac malformations is in line with accepted international standards. Conversely, the access to invasive treatment was limited over the period of observation, albeit that the waiting list was reduced significantly by the end of the second epoch. The postoperative mortality for those suffering congenital cardiac malformations is also comparable with international standards, except for mortality during infancy for treatment of complex anomalies. Our audit highlights the need for surgical repair of the more complex malformations during infancy.

Keywords

Clinical auditinfant mortalitywaiting listscongenital heart diseaseHungary
Type
Original Article
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , April 2006 , pp. 128 - 134
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bolsin SN. Professional misconduct: the Bristol case. Med J Aust 1998; 169: 369–372.Google Scholar
Smith R. All changed, changed utterly. BMJ 1998; 316: 1917–1918.Google Scholar
Department of Health: Learning from Bristol: the Report of the Public Inquiry into Children's Heart Surgery at the Bristol Royal Infirmary 1984–1995. Command paper CM 5207. London: The Stationery Office, 2001.
Fraser RC. Medical audit in general practice. Trainee 1982; 2: 113–115.Google Scholar
Institute of Medicine: Guidelines for Clinical Practice. From Development to Use. In: Field M, Lohr KN, (eds). National Academy Press, Washington DC, 1992.
Baker R, Fraser RC. Development of review criteria: linking guidelines and assessment of quality. BMJ 1995; 311: 370–373.Google Scholar
Report of the Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Services Review Group. Department of Health. London. 2003. www.advisorybodies.doh.gov.uk/childcardiac, accessed: February 20th 2004.
Moller JH (ed.). Perspectives in Pediatric Cardiology, Vol. 6. Surgery of Congenital Heart Disease. Futura Publishing Company, Armonk, 1998, pp 27–30.
Gibbs JL, Monro JL, Cunningham D, Rickards A. Survival after surgery or therapeutic catheterisation for congenital heart disease in children in the United Kingdom: analysis of the central cardiac audit database for 2000–2001. BMJ 2004; 328: 611–615.Google Scholar
Abu-Harb M, Hey E, Wren C. Death in infancy from unrecognised congenital heart disease. Arch Dis Child 1994; 71: 3–7.Google Scholar
Wren C, Richmond S, Donaldson L. Presentation of congenital heart disease in infancy: implications for routine examination Arch Dis Child Feta Neonat Ed 1999; 80: F49–F53.Google Scholar
Kuehl KS, Loffredo CA, Ferencz C. Failure to diagnose congenital heart disease in infancy. Pediatrics 1999; 103: 743–747.Google Scholar
Cronk CE, Malloy ME, Pelech AN et al. Completeness of state administrative databases for surveillance of congenital heart disease. Birth Defects Res. Part A: Clin Mol Teratol 2003; 67: 597–603.Google Scholar