Changes in NHS organization of care and management of hospital admissions with COPD exacerbations between the national COPD audits of 2003 and 2008.

BACKGROUND: The 2003 UK Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) audit revealed wide variability between hospital units in care delivered. AIMS: To assess whether processes of care, patient outcomes and organization of care have improved since 2003. DESIGN: A UK national audit was performed in 2008 to survey the organization and delivery of clinical care provided to patients admitted to hospital with COPD. METHODS: All UK acute hospital Trusts (units) were invited to participate. Each unit completed cross-sectional resource and organization questionnaires and a prospective clinical audit comprising up to 60 consecutively admitted cases of COPD exacerbation. Comparison between 2003 and 2008 includes aggregated statistics for units participating in both audit rounds. RESULTS: A total of 192 units participated in both audit rounds (6197 admissions in 2003 and 8170 in 2008). In 2008, patients were older and of a poorer functional class. Overall mortality was unchanged but adjusting for age and performance status, inpatient mortality (P = 0.05) and 90-day mortality (P = 0.001) were both reduced in 2008. More patients were discharged under a respiratory specialist (P < 0.01), treated with non-invasive ventilation if acidotic (P < 0.001) and accepted onto early discharge schemes (P < 0.01) while median length of stay fell from 6 to 5 days (P < 0.001). Within these mean data, however, there remains considerable inter-unit variation in organization, resources and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Overall improvements in resources and organization are accompanied by reduced mortality, shorter admissions and greater access to specialist services. There remains, however, considerable variation in the quality of secondary care provided between units.

Acidosis, non-invasive ventilation and mortality in hospitalised COPD exacerbations.

BACKGROUND: Reports of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) use in clinical practice reveal higher mortality rates than in corresponding randomised clinical trials. AIM: To explore factors related to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) admissions and NIV use that may explain some of the previously reported high mortality rates. METHODS: National UK audit of clinical care of consecutive COPD admissions from March to May 2008. Retrospective case note audit with prospective case ascertainment. Participating units completed a web-based audit proforma of process and outcomes of clinical care. RESULTS: 232 hospital units collected data on 9716 patients, mean age 73, 50% male. 1678 (20%) of those with gases recorded on admission were acidotic and another 6% became acidotic later. 1077 patients received NIV, 55% had a pH<7.26 and 49% (305/618) had or were still receiving high flow oxygen. 30% (136/453) patients with persisting respiratory acidosis did not receive NIV while 11% (15/131) of acidotic admissions had a pure metabolic acidosis and did. Hospital mortality was 25% (270/1077) for patients receiving NIV but 39% (86/219) for those with late onset acidosis and was higher in all acidotic groups receiving NIV than those treated without. Only 4% of patients receiving NIV who died had invasive mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: COPD admissions treated with NIV in usual clinical practice were severely ill, many with mixed metabolic acidosis. Some eligible patients failed to receive NIV, others received it inappropriately. NIV appears to be often used as a ceiling of treatment including patient groups in whom efficacy of NIV is uncertain. The audit raises concerns that challenge the respiratory community to lead appropriate clinical improvements across the acute sector.

A randomised trial of peer review: the UK National Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Resources and Outcomes Project.

Peer review has been widely employed within the NHS to facilitate health quality improvement but has not been rigorously evaluated. This article reports the largest randomised trial of peer review ever conducted in the UK. The peer review intervention was a reciprocal supportive exercise that included clinicians, hospital management, commissioners and patients which focused on the quality of the provision of four specific evidence-based aspects of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease care. Follow up at 12 months demonstrated few quantitative differences in the number or quality of services offered in the two groups. Qualitative data in contrast suggested many benefits of peer review in most but not all intervention units and some control teams. Findings suggest peer review in this format is a positive experience for most participants but is ineffective in some situations. Its longer term benefits and cost effectiveness require further study. The generic findings of this study have potential implications for the application of peer review throughout the NHS.