Tracy Wasylak

The Alberta hip and knee replacement project: A model for health technology assessment based on comparative effectiveness of clinical pathways

BACKGROUND The Alberta Hip and Knee Replacement Project developed a new evidence-based clinical pathway (NCP) for total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement. The aim was to facilitate the delivery of services in a timely and cost-effective manner while achieving the highest quality of care for the patient across the full continuum of care from patient referral to an orthopedic surgeon through surgery, recovery, and rehabilitation. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the study design, rationale, and execution of this project as a model for health technology assessment based on comparative effectiveness of alternative clinical pathways. METHODS A pragmatic randomized controlled trial study design was used to evaluate the NCP compared with the standard of care (SOC) for these procedures. The pragmatic study design was selected as a rigorous approach to produce high quality evidence suitable for informing decisions between relevant interventions in real clinical practice. The NCP was evaluated in three of the nine regional health authorities (RHAs) in Alberta with dedicated central intake clinics offering multidisciplinary care teams, constituting 80 percent of THR and TKR surgeries performed annually in Alberta. Patients were identified in the offices of twenty orthopedic surgeons who routinely performed THR or TKR surgeries. Evaluation outcome measures were based on the six dimensions of the Alberta Quality Matrix for Health (AQMH): acceptability, accessibility, appropriateness, effectiveness, efficiency and safety. Data were collected prospectively through patient self-completed questionnaires at baseline and 3 and 12 months after surgery, ambulatory and inpatient chart reviews, and electronic administrative data. RESULTS The trial design was successful in establishing similar groups for rigorous evaluation. Of the 4,985 patients invited to participate, 69 percent of patients consented. A total of 3,434 patients were randomized: 1,712 to SOC and 1,722 to the NCP. The baseline characteristics of patients in the two study arms, including demographics, comorbidity as measured by CDS and exposure to pain medications, and health-related quality of life, as measured by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and Short Form-36, were similar. CONCLUSIONS The Alberta Hip and Knee Replacement Project demonstrates the feasibility and advantages of applying a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to ascertain comparative effectiveness. This is a model for health technology assessment that incorporates how clinical pathways can be effectively evaluated.

Comparative effectiveness of alternative clinical pathways for primary hip and knee joint replacement patients: a pragmatic randomized, controlled trial

OBJECTIVE Total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) (arthroplasty) surgery for end-stage osteoarthritis (OA) are ideal candidates for optimization through an algorithmic care pathway. Using a comparative effectiveness study design, we compared the effectiveness of a new clinical pathway (NCP) featuring central intake clinics, dedicated inpatient resources, care guidelines and efficiency benchmarks vs. the standard of care (SOC) for THR or TKR. METHODS We compared patients undergoing primary THR and TKR who received surgery in NCP vs. SOC in a randomised controlled trial within the trial timeframe. 1,570 patients (1,066 SOC and 504 NCP patients) that underwent surgery within the study timeframe from urban and rural practice settings were included. The primary endpoint was improvement in Western Ontario and McMaster University osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) overall score over 12 months post-surgery. Secondary endpoints were improvements in the physical function (PF) and bodily pain (BP) domains of the Short Form 36 (SF-36). RESULTS NCP patients had significantly greater improvements from baseline WOMAC scores compared to SOC patients after adjusting for covariates (treatment effect=2.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.10-4.01]). SF-36 BP scores were significantly improved for both hip and knee patients in the NCP (treatment effect=3.01, 95% CI [0.70-5.32]), but SF-36 PF scores were not. Effects of the NCP were more pronounced in knee patients. CONCLUSION While effect sizes were small compared with major effects of the surgery itself, an evidence-informed clinical pathway can improve health related quality of life (HRQoL) of hip and knee arthroplasty patients with degenerative joint disorder in routine clinical practice for up to 12 months post-operatively. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00277186.

Development of key performance indicators to evaluate centralized intake for patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis

IntroductionCentralized intake is integral to healthcare systems to support timely access to appropriate health services. The aim of this study was to develop key performance indicators (KPIs) to evaluate centralized intake systems for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsPhase 1 involved stakeholder meetings including healthcare providers, managers, researchers and patients to obtain input on candidate KPIs, aligned along six quality dimensions: appropriateness, accessibility, acceptability, efficiency, effectiveness, and safety. Phase 2 involved literature reviews to ensure KPIs were based on best practices and harmonized with existing measures. Phase 3 involved a three-round, online modified Delphi panel to finalize the KPIs. The panel consisted of two rounds of rating and a round of online and in-person discussions. KPIs rated as valid and important (≥7 on a 9-point Likert scale) were included in the final set.ResultsTwenty-five KPIs identified and substantiated during Phases 1 and 2 were submitted to 27 panellists including healthcare providers, managers, researchers, and patients in Phase 3. After the in-person meeting, three KPIs were removed and six were suggested. The final set includes 9 OA KPIs, 10 RA KPIs and 9 relating to centralized intake processes for both conditions. All 28 KPIs were rated as valid and important.ConclusionsArthritis stakeholders have proposed 28 KPIs that should be used in quality improvement efforts when evaluating centralized intake for OA and RA. The KPIs measure five of the six dimensions of quality and are relevant to patients, practitioners and health systems.

An economic evaluation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) multisite implementation program for colorectal surgery in Alberta

BACKGROUND In February 2013, Alberta Health Services established an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) implementation program for adopting the ERAS Society colorectal guidelines into 6 sites (initial phase) that perform more than 75% of all colorectal surgeries in the province. We conducted an economic evaluation of this initiative to not only determine its cost-effectiveness, but also to inform strategy for the spread and scale of ERAS to other surgical protocols and sites. METHODS We assessed the impact of ERAS on patients’ health services utilization (HSU; length of stay [LOS], readmissions, emergency department visits, general practitioner and specialist visits) within 30 days of discharge by comparing pre- and post-ERAS groups using multilevel negative binomial regressions. We estimated the net health care costs/savings and the return on investment (ROI) associated with those impacts for post-ERAS patients using a decision analytic modelling technique. RESULTS We included 331 pre- and 1295 post-ERAS patients in our analyses. ERAS was associated with a reduction in all HSU outcomes except visits to specialists. However, only the reduction in primary LOS was significant. The net health system savings were estimated at

Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: a strategy to transform surgical care across a health system

2 290 000 (range

Estimating the Burden of Osteoarthritis to Plan for the Future

1 191 000–

“Part of the Team”: Mapping the outcomes of training patients for new roles in health research and planning

3 391 000), or

Patients as partners in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: A qualitative patient-led study

1768 (range

Strategic clinical networks in Alberta: Structures, processes, and early outcomes

920–

A study of the effectiveness of performance-focused methodology for improved outcomes in Alberta public healthcare.

2619) per patient. The probability for the program to be cost-saving was 73%–83%. In terms of ROI, every