Literature DB >> 19834768

National Quality Measures for Breast Centers (NQMBC): a robust quality tool: breast center quality measures.

C S Kaufman1, L Shockney, B Rabinowitz, C Coleman, C Beard, J Landercasper, J B Askew, D Wiggins.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Measuring and improving quality of care is of primary interest to patients, clinicians, and payers. The National Consortium of Breast Centers (NCBC) has created a unique program to assess and compare the quality of interdisciplinary breast care provided by breast centers across the country.
METHODS: In 2005 the NCBC Quality Initiative Committee formulated their initial series of 37 measurements of breast center quality, eventually called the National Quality Measures for Breast Centers (NQMBC). Measures were derived from published literature as well as expert opinion. An interactive website was created to enter measurement data from individual breast centers and to provide customized comparison reports. Breast centers submit information using data they collect over a single month on consecutive patients. Centers can compare their results with centers of similar size and demographic or compare themselves to all centers who supplied answers for individual measures. New data may be submitted twice yearly. Serially submitted data allow centers to compare themselves over time. NQMBC random audits confirm accuracy of submitted data. Early results on several initial measures are reported here.
RESULTS: Over 200 centers are currently submitting data to the NQMBC via the Internet without charge. These measures provide insight regarding timeliness of care provided by radiologists, surgeons, and pathologists. Results are expressed as the mean average, as well as 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles for each metric. This sample of seven measures includes data from over 30,000 patients since 2005, representing a powerful database. In addition, comparison results are available every 6 months, recognizing that benchmarks may change over time.
CONCLUSIONS: A real-time web-based quality improvement program facilitates breast center input, providing immediate comparisons with other centers and results serially over time. Data may be used by centers to recognize high-quality care they provide or to identify areas for quality improvement. Initial results demonstrate the power and potential of web-based tools for data collection and analysis from hundreds of centers who care for thousands of patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19834768     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-009-0729-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  20 in total

1.  Invited commentary.

Authors:  Marquita R Decker; Caprice C Greenberg
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 6.113

2.  Factors associated with the frequency of initial total mastectomy: results of a multi-institutional study.

Authors:  Heather Spencer Feigelson; Ted A James; Richard M Single; Adedayo A Onitilo; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Tom Barney; Jordan E Bakerman; Laurence E McCahill
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 6.113

3.  Racial Differences in Time to Breast Cancer Surgery and Overall Survival in the US Military Health System.

Authors:  Yvonne L Eaglehouse; Matthew W Georg; Craig D Shriver; Kangmin Zhu
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2019-03-20       Impact factor: 14.766

4.  Preoperative delays in the US Medicare population with breast cancer.

Authors:  Richard J Bleicher; Karen Ruth; Elin R Sigurdson; Eric Ross; Yu-Ning Wong; Sameer A Patel; Marcia Boraas; Neal S Topham; Brian L Egleston
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-11-19       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Time from Screening Mammography to Biopsy and from Biopsy to Breast Cancer Treatment among Black and White, Women Medicare Beneficiaries Not Participating in a Health Maintenance Organization.

Authors:  Rebecca Selove; Barbara Kilbourne; Mary Kay Fadden; Maureen Sanderson; Maya Foster; Regina Offodile; Baqar Husaini; Charles Mouton; Robert S Levine
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2016-10-20

6.  Rural-urban disparities in use of post-lumpectomy radiation.

Authors:  Steve R Martinez; Dhruvil R Shah; Warren H Tseng; Robert J Canter; Richard J Bold
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2012-06-09       Impact factor: 3.064

7.  Determinants of breast cancer treatment delay differ for African American and White women.

Authors:  Sasha A McGee; Danielle D Durham; Chiu-Kit Tse; Robert C Millikan
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Time to Surgery and Breast Cancer Survival in the United States.

Authors:  Richard J Bleicher; Karen Ruth; Elin R Sigurdson; J Robert Beck; Eric Ross; Yu-Ning Wong; Sameer A Patel; Marcia Boraas; Eric I Chang; Neal S Topham; Brian L Egleston
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 31.777

9.  Development and feasibility of a set of quality indicators relative to the timeliness and organisation of care for new breast cancer patients undergoing surgery.

Authors:  Marie Ferrua; Mélanie Couralet; Gérard Nitenberg; Sandrine Morin; Daniel Serin; Etienne Minvielle
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-06-21       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: A systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium.

Authors:  Chyke A Doubeni; Nicole B Gabler; Cosette M Wheeler; Anne Marie McCarthy; Philip E Castle; Ethan A Halm; Mitchell D Schnall; Celette S Skinner; Anna N A Tosteson; Donald L Weaver; Anil Vachani; Shivan J Mehta; Katharine A Rendle; Stacey A Fedewa; Douglas A Corley; Katrina Armstrong
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 508.702

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.