Effectiveness of Data-Driven Quality Improvement on Hospitalizations and Health Outcomes for People With Coronary Heart Disease in Primary Care (QUEL): A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial With 24-Month Follow-Up
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 16, 2026

A Novel Digital Platform for a Monitored Home-based Cardiac Rehabilitation Program
Published on: April 19, 2019
Julie Redfern1,2,3,4, Nashid Hafiz3, Qiang Tu3
1Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare (J.R.), Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia.
Insights
A data-driven quality improvement program in primary care did not reduce cardiovascular hospitalizations or major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in coronary heart disease (CHD) patients. Further evidence is needed to support such collaborative approaches for CHD care.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Primary Care Medicine
- Health Services Research
Background:
- Coronary heart disease (CHD) management in primary care requires effective quality improvement strategies.
- Assessing data-driven programs is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate a data-driven quality improvement program versus standard care for CHD patients.
- To determine the program's impact on cardiovascular hospitalizations, MACE, risk factors, and medications at 24 months.
Main Methods:
- A single-blind, cluster randomized controlled trial involving 51 Australian primary care practices.
- Intervention group received 12-month data-driven quality improvement; control group received standard care.
- Primary outcome: unplanned cardiovascular hospitalizations; secondary outcomes: MACE, medication, risk factors, management planning.
Main Results:
- No significant differences were observed between groups for unplanned cardiovascular hospitalizations (RR 0.91) or MACE (RR 0.81) at 24 months.
- No significant improvements were found in medication prescriptions, risk factor targets (LDL-C, BP, smoking), or management planning.
Conclusions:
- The tested data-driven quality improvement program did not enhance outcomes for CHD patients in primary care.
- Current evidence does not robustly support data-driven, collaborative approaches for improving CHD care in this setting.
Background:
This trial aimed to test the effectiveness of a data-driven quality improvement program in primary care on cardiovascular hospitalizations, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), risk factor profiles, and medication prescriptions at 24 months in people with coronary heart disease (CHD) compared with standard care.
Methods:
A single-blind, cluster randomized controlled trial recruiting Australian primary care practices (2019-2022) was conducted. Practices using compliant data extraction software and having ≥200 adult patients annually with CHD were the units of randomization, and adults with CHD (who visited their general practitioner in the past 12 months) were the units of analysis. Practices were randomized to intervention (12-month data-driven quality improvement including benchmarking, monthly reporting, and improvement planning) or control (standard care). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who had unplanned cardiovascular disease hospitalizations at 24 months. Secondary outcomes were MACE, medication prescriptions, risk factor targets, and management planning. Data were extracted from electronic records linked to administrative data.
Results:
A total of 51 primary care practices participated, resulting in a patient cohort of 7864. The mean age of the patient cohort was 71.9 (±11.8) years, 68% were men, and 24% had a prior myocardial infarction. At 24 months, there was no significant difference between the groups for unplanned cardiovascular disease hospitalizations (relative risk, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.75-1.10]; MACE, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.61-1.07]; prescription of antiplatelet, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.79-1.13]), statin, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.97-1.09], angiotensin-converting enzyme or angiotensin receptor blocker, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.93-1.07]; risk factor targets for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.86-1.13], systolic blood pressure, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.87-1.09], or smoking, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.57-1.59]; or management planning, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.64-1.63]).
Conclusions:
A primary care, data-driven quality improvement program did not improve unplanned hospitalizations, MACE, medication prescriptions, achievement of risk factor targets, or management planning for people with CHD. Robust evidence for the use of a data-driven, collaborative approach to improving care for people with CHD in primary care remains elusive.
Registration:
URL: https://www.anzctr.org.au; Unique identifier: ACTRN12619001790134.
More Related Videos
06:55Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
05:41Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery Ligation for Ischemia-Reperfusion Research: Model Improvement via Technical Modifications and Quality Control
Published on: December 16, 2022
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Coronary Artery Disease IV: Preventive Measures
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Health Information Technology and Healthcare Information System
Health Information Technology, commonly called HIT, integrates advanced information systems and technology in healthcare settings. Its primary functions include:
Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...
Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring
Several factors...