title: Are there commonalities among audit tools used to measure carotid endarterectomy outcomes in New South Wales?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  To prepare for a state-wide audit of carotid endarterectomy (CEA), we sought to ascertain pre-existing practices and identify common process and outcome measures among audits tools used by NSW vascular surgeons.
  
  
  METHODS
  Telephone survey comprising five questions about CEA audit practices.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of 37 known vascular surgeons in NSW, all performed CEA and agreed to participate in our telephone survey (response rate 100%). All but one reported collecting CEA data (97%). Two thirds of these collected data prospectively. From those 19 surgeons (51%) who stated that they used standard tools for audit, we received five CEA-specific tools. Process measures common to all five were: side of CEA, date of operation, sex, past history of hypertension, history of diabetes, use of shunt, use of patch. There were only three outcome measures common to all five CEA-specific tools: postoperative transient ischaemic attack (TIA), postoperative stroke, and postoperative death. Data about outcomes beyond discharge were inconsistently collected.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  While most vascular surgeons in NSW report collecting information about CEA outcomes, not all do so prospectively. Only three outcomes (postoperative TIA, postoperative stroke and death) were common to all tools, inviting the development and use of a comprehensive and standard tool.
authors.affiliation: Needs Assessment and Health Outcomes Unit, Central Sydney Area Health Service, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
authors.forename: Sandy
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Middleton
authors.forename: Jeanette
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Ward
mesh_terms: D016894:Endarterectomy, Carotid / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D008485:Medical Audit / Q000379:methods*; D009517:New South Wales; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D016896:Treatment Outcome