Data quality methods through remote source data verification auditing: results from the Congenital Cardiac Research Collaborative.

2021

1-6

2021 Mar 17

1467-1107

<p><strong>BACKGROUND: </strong>Multicentre research databases can provide insights into healthcare processes to improve outcomes and make practice recommendations for novel approaches. Effective audits can establish a framework for reporting research efforts, ensuring accurate reporting, and spearheading quality improvement. Although a variety of data auditing models and standards exist, barriers to effective auditing including costs, regulatory requirements, travel, and design complexity must be considered.</p>

<p><strong>MATERIALS AND METHODS: </strong>The Congenital Cardiac Research Collaborative conducted a virtual data training initiative and remote source data verification audit on a retrospective multicentre dataset. CCRC investigators across nine institutions were trained to extract and enter data into a robust dataset on patients with tetralogy of Fallot who required neonatal intervention. Centres provided de-identified source files for a randomised 10% patient sample audit. Key auditing variables, discrepancy types, and severity levels were analysed across two study groups, primary repair and staged repair.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>Of the total 572 study patients, data from 58 patients (31 staged repairs and 27 primary repairs) were source data verified. Amongst the 1790 variables audited, 45 discrepancies were discovered, resulting in an overall accuracy rate of 97.5%. High accuracy rates were consistent across all CCRC institutions ranging from 94.6% to 99.4% and were reported for both minor (1.5%) and major discrepancies type classifications (1.1%).</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSION: </strong>Findings indicate that implementing a virtual multicentre training initiative and remote source data verification audit can identify data quality concerns and produce a reliable, high-quality dataset. Remote auditing capacity is especially important during the current COVID-19 pandemic.</p>

10.1017/S1047951121000974

Cardiol Young

33726868

Comparison of Management Strategies for Neonates With Symptomatic Tetralogy of Fallot.

2021

1093-1106

2021 Mar 02

1558-3597

<p><strong>BACKGROUND: </strong>Neonates with tetralogy of Fallot and symptomatic cyanosis (sTOF) require early intervention.</p>

<p><strong>OBJECTIVES: </strong>This study sought to perform a balanced multicenter comparison of staged repair (SR) (initial palliation [IP] and subsequent complete repair [CR]) versus primary repair (PR) treatment strategies.</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong>Consecutive neonates with sTOF who underwent IP or PR at&nbsp;≤30&nbsp;days of age from 2005 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed from the Congenital Cardiac Research Collaborative. The primary outcome was death. Secondary outcomes included component (IP, CR, PR) and cumulative (SR): hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay; durations of cardiopulmonary bypass, anesthesia, ventilation, and inotrope use; and complication and reintervention rates. Outcomes were compared using propensity score adjustment.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>The cohort consisted of 342 patients who underwent SR (IP: surgical, n&nbsp;=&nbsp;256; transcatheter, n&nbsp;=&nbsp;86) and 230 patients who underwent PR. Pre-procedural ventilation, prematurity, DiGeorge syndrome, and pulmonary atresia were more common in the SR group (p&nbsp;≤0.01). The observed risk of death was not different between the groups (10.2% vs 7.4%; p&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.25) at median 4.3 years. After adjustment, the hazard of death remained similar between groups (hazard ratio: 0.82; 95% confidence interval: 0.49 to 1.38; p&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.456), but it favored SR during early follow-up (&lt;4&nbsp;months; p&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.041). Secondary outcomes favored the SR group in component analysis, whereas they largely favored PR in cumulative analysis. Reintervention risk was higher in the SR group (p&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.002).</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>In this multicenter comparison of SR or PR for management of neonates with sTOF, adjusted for patient-related factors, early mortality and neonatal morbidity were lower in the SR group, but cumulative morbidity and reinterventions favored the PR group, findings suggesting potential benefits to each strategy.</p>

10.1016/j.jacc.2020.12.048

J Am Coll Cardiol

33632484

Comprehensive comparative outcomes in children with congenital heart disease: The rationale for the Congenital Catheterization Research Collaborative.

2019

341-349

2019 May

1747-0803

<p>Clinical research in the treatment of patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) is limited by the wide variety of CHD manifestations and therapeutic options as well as the generally low incidence of CHD. The availability of comprehensive, contemporary outcomes studies is therefore limited. This inadequacy may result in a lack of data-driven medical decision making. In 2013, clinician scientists at two centers began a research collaboration, the Congenital Catheterization Research Collaborative (CCRC). Over time, the CCRC has grown to include nine cardiac centers from across the United States, with a common data coordinating center. The CCRC seeks to generate high-quality, contemporary, statistically robust, and generalizable outcomes research which can help address important clinical questions in the treatment of CHD. To date, the CCRC has reported on multicenter outcomes in: neonates with congenital aortic stenosis, infants undergoing right ventricular decompression for pulmonary atresia and intact ventricular septum, and infants with ductal-dependent pulmonary blood flow. The CCRC has been successful at leveraging large multicenter cohorts of patients in a contemporary period to perform comparative studies. In the future, the CCRC plans to continue to perform hypothesis-driven retrospective and prospective observational studies of CHD populations where controversy exists or where novel interventions or therapies have emerged. Quality improvement efforts including lesion-specific registry development may be an additional potential future target.</p>

10.1111/chd.12737

Congenit Heart Dis

31183955