Skip to main content

Table 8 Results and secular trend on five general CR processes all centres received feedback upon (additional analysis): complete case analysis including correction for case mix

From: Effect of a web-based audit and feedback intervention with outreach visits on the clinical performance of multidisciplinary teams: a cluster-randomized trial in cardiac rehabilitation

Care processes

Type

Crude baseline performance

Crude follow-up performance

Performance trend [OR (95% CI)]

N (centres)

Missing values

Indicators referring to general processes (both study groups)

ā€ƒ18. Median time between hospital discharge and needs assessment procedure

Process

64.0% (1137/1778)

60.3% (5212/8646)

0.77 (0.57 to 1.05)

10,424 (18)

2169 (17.2%)

ā€ƒ19. Patients who are offered a rehabilitation plan tailored to their needs

Process

87.3% (2034/2331)

88.4% (9073/10,262)

0.92 (0.74 to 1.13)

12,593 (18)

0 (0%)

ā€ƒ20. Patients who had their rehabilitation goals evaluated after CR

Process

41.1% (957/2331)

34.7% (3565/10,262)

1.25 (0.90 to 1.74)

8178 (18)

0 (0%)

ā€ƒ21. Patients for whom their cardiologist and GP receive a report after CR

Process

38.4% (444/1156)

51.2% (1978/3861)

1.63 (0.89 to 2.98)

5017 (18)

7576 (60.2%)

  1. Baseline period: first 3Ā months of study period; follow-up period: complete study period minus the baseline period. Performance trends: odds ratios associated with a 1-year study follow-up, adjusted for patientsā€™ age, gender, indication for CR, and centresā€™ type and size
  2. Abbreviations: CI confidence interval, CR cardiac rehabilitation, GP general practitioner, OR odds ratio