Quality indicators in pleural pathology

<b>Introduction:</b> Neumomadrid (Madrilenian Society of Pulmonology and Thoracic Surgery) published in 2017 Quality Indicators for the management of respiratory diseases. The Pleura Working Group participated in the development of 8 indicators. <b>Objectives:</b> The aim of this study was to measure the level of compliance for 2 Pleural Pathology Indicators: 1. Informed consent (IC) in thoracentesis (T) 2. IC in closed pleural biopsy (CPB) <b>Material and Methods:</b> Retrospective study carried out in 6 hospitals of Madrid. We selected T y CPB performed by the Pulmonology Service between 1/12/2016 and 28/2/2017. Cases were recruited through records of the Central Laboratories and Technical Room. - Including criteria: patients ≥16 years with pleural effusion (PE) in whom the pulmonologist performed T and/or CBP. - Exclusion criteria: patients &lt;16 years and PE studied in other Services. - Variables: age, sex, model of IC, digitalization of the hospital, presence of IC "correctly completed". - It was considered correctly completed when the signature of the patient and doctor appeared as many times as requested in all sheets indicated. - It was considered good level of compliance when IC was present in &gt;90% of CR. <b>Results:</b> 146 T were performed (63 women, 83 men, mean age 69) and 20 CBPs (7 women, 13 men, mean age 64). Overall, IC of the T was correctly completed in 125 (85.6%) of the CR and the IC of the CPB in 18 (90%). 3 hospitals (50%) met the IC objective in T and 5 (83%) in CPB. 4 hospitals are digitalized. Only one uses digital signature. <b>Conclusions:</b> - Quality Indicator of IC was better accomplished in CBP than in T. - There are different types of IC located in the CR/digital/partial files. - There is need for a more homogenized and simplified IC to improve compliance.