PURPOSE: The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) became available to all American Society of Clinical Oncology member physicians in 2006 as a voluntary medical oncology practice-based quality measurement and improvement project. QOPI assesses practice performance for a series of evidence- and consensus-based process measures, relying on practices to complete structured chart reviews and submit data via a secure Web-based portal. METHODS: This analysis focused on the 71 practices that participated in both the March and September 2006 data collections (7,624 charts abstracted in March and 10,240 in September). Among 33 measures common to both collections, five measures were closely correlated, and 28 are included in the final analysis. Composite scores were created for six different domains of care. Statistical significance was tested on both absolute changes and relative changes (relative failure reduction) of quality measures from baseline to follow-up and between the lower quartile and all other quartiles. RESULTS: Practice performance on individual measures varied between 18.8% and 98.6%. Mean overall performance as measured by a composite score increased from 78.7% in March to 82.3% in September (P < .05). Improvement was most marked among practices originally performing in the bottom quartile. Using a composite score, the absolute and relative performance for the bottom quartile improved by 27% and 35%, respectively, statistically superior to that of all others. CONCLUSION: Practices that participated in QOPI demonstrated improved performance in self-reported process measures, with the greatest improvement demonstrated in initially low-performing practices.
PURPOSE: The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) became available to all American Society of Clinical Oncology member physicians in 2006 as a voluntary medical oncology practice-based quality measurement and improvement project. QOPI assesses practice performance for a series of evidence- and consensus-based process measures, relying on practices to complete structured chart reviews and submit data via a secure Web-based portal. METHODS: This analysis focused on the 71 practices that participated in both the March and September 2006 data collections (7,624 charts abstracted in March and 10,240 in September). Among 33 measures common to both collections, five measures were closely correlated, and 28 are included in the final analysis. Composite scores were created for six different domains of care. Statistical significance was tested on both absolute changes and relative changes (relative failure reduction) of quality measures from baseline to follow-up and between the lower quartile and all other quartiles. RESULTS: Practice performance on individual measures varied between 18.8% and 98.6%. Mean overall performance as measured by a composite score increased from 78.7% in March to 82.3% in September (P < .05). Improvement was most marked among practices originally performing in the bottom quartile. Using a composite score, the absolute and relative performance for the bottom quartile improved by 27% and 35%, respectively, statistically superior to that of all others. CONCLUSION: Practices that participated in QOPI demonstrated improved performance in self-reported process measures, with the greatest improvement demonstrated in initially low-performing practices.
Authors: Douglas W Blayney; Philip J Stella; Thomas Ruane; Jane Martin; Beth Lavasseur; Thomas Leyden; Mary Malloy Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Craig McFadyen; Sara Lankshear; Dimitrios Divaris; Mark Berry; Amber Hunter; John Srigley; Jonathan Irish Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: David E Cowall; Bennett W Yu; Sandra L Heineken; Elizabeth N Lewis; Vishal Chaudhry; Joan M Daugherty Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2012-05-22 Impact factor: 3.840