OBJECTIVE: Little performance measurement has been undertaken in the area of oncology, particularly for surgery which is a pivotal event in the continuum of cancer care. This work was conducted to develop indicators of quality ovarian cancer surgery using a modified three-step Delphi approach. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel, comprised of surgical and methodologic co-chairs, nine surgeons, one medical oncologist, one radiation oncologist, a nurse, and a pathologist, reviewed potential indicators extracted from the medical literature through two consecutive rounds of rating followed by consensus discussion. The panel then prioritized the indicators selected in the previous two rounds. RESULTS: Of 33 possible indicators that emerged from 41 selected articles, 14 were prioritized by the panel as benchmarks for assessing the quality of surgical care. The 14 indicators represent three levels of measurement (provincial/regional, hospital, individual provider) across several phases of care (diagnosis, surgery, pathology, and adjuvant therapy), as well as broad measures of access and outcomes. Some of the indicators selected by the panel were also recommended as standards of care by national initiatives in other countries. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic evidence- and consensus-based approach was used to develop quality indicators of ovarian cancer care, with a focus on pre-, peri-, and postoperative care as well as outcomes, that are applicable in any jurisdiction.
OBJECTIVE: Little performance measurement has been undertaken in the area of oncology, particularly for surgery which is a pivotal event in the continuum of cancer care. This work was conducted to develop indicators of quality ovarian cancer surgery using a modified three-step Delphi approach. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel, comprised of surgical and methodologic co-chairs, nine surgeons, one medical oncologist, one radiation oncologist, a nurse, and a pathologist, reviewed potential indicators extracted from the medical literature through two consecutive rounds of rating followed by consensus discussion. The panel then prioritized the indicators selected in the previous two rounds. RESULTS: Of 33 possible indicators that emerged from 41 selected articles, 14 were prioritized by the panel as benchmarks for assessing the quality of surgical care. The 14 indicators represent three levels of measurement (provincial/regional, hospital, individual provider) across several phases of care (diagnosis, surgery, pathology, and adjuvant therapy), as well as broad measures of access and outcomes. Some of the indicators selected by the panel were also recommended as standards of care by national initiatives in other countries. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic evidence- and consensus-based approach was used to develop quality indicators of ovarian cancer care, with a focus on pre-, peri-, and postoperative care as well as outcomes, that are applicable in any jurisdiction.
Authors: Chad G Ball; Henry A Pitt; Molly E Kilbane; Elijah Dixon; Francis R Sutherland; Keith D Lillemoe Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Misa Matsuyama; Mythily Sachchithananthan; Robyn Leonard; Michael Besser; Anna K Nowak; Donna Truran; Claire M Vajdic; John R Zalcberg; Hui K Gan; Craig Gedye; Winny Varikatt; Eng-Siew Koh; Ganessan Kichenadasse; Hao-Wen Sim; Nicholas G Gottardo; Desma Spyridopoulos; Rosalind L Jeffree Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2021-08-31
Authors: Laurie M Elit; Susan J Bondy; Lawrence P Paszat; Eric J Holowaty; Gillian M Thomas; Therese A Stukel; Mark N Levine Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Husna Begum; Swarna Vishwanath; Michelle Merenda; Mark Tacey; Nicola Dean; Elisabeth Elder; Marc Mureau; Ron Bezic; Pamela Carter; Rodney D Cooter; Anand Deva; Arul Earnest; Michael Higgs; Howard Klein; Mark Magnusson; Colin Moore; Hinne Rakhorst; Christobel Saunders; Birgit Stark; Ingrid Hopper Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2019-08-19
Authors: Amy Knott; Samir Pathak; John S McGrath; Robin Kennedy; Alan Horgan; Monty Mythen; Fiona Carter; Nader K Francis Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2012-12-12 Impact factor: 2.692