4.3 Article

Evaluation of compliance with the Tokyo Guidelines for the management of acute cholangitis based on the Japanese administrative database associated with the Diagnosis Procedure Combination system

Journal

JOURNAL OF HEPATO-BILIARY-PANCREATIC SCIENCES
Volume 18, Issue 1, Pages 53-59

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1007/s00534-010-0302-4

Keywords

Acute cholangitis; Tokyo Guidelines; Compliance; Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC)

Funding

  1. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We aimed to evaluate compliance with the clinical practice guidelines for acute cholangitis (Tokyo Guidelines) using the Japanese administrative database associated with the Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) system. We collected database data from 60,842 acute cholangitis patients, examining 10 recommendations in the Tokyo Guidelines. We counted how many recommendations had been complied with for every patient. The patient compliance score was defined as the rate of compliance with these recommendations (score 0 = 0% to score 10 = 100%). An aggregated patient compliance score was measured according to the severity of acute cholangitis. Severity was categorized as grade I (mild cholangitis; n = 49,630), grade II (moderate cholangitis; n = 10,444), and grade III (severe cholangitis; n = 768). The mean patient compliance score was significantly higher for patients with grade III than for those with grades II and I (7.6 +/- A 2.1 vs. 6.5 +/- A 3.0 vs. 2.9 +/- A 0.9, p < 0.001, respectively). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that the severity of acute cholangitis was the parameter most significantly associated with the patient compliance score. The standardized coefficient of grade III was higher than that of grade II (0.657 vs. 0.248, p < 0.001). Compliance with the Tokyo Guidelines became higher in accordance with the severity of acute cholangitis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available