Literature DB >> 20576399

The Quality of Cancer Care initiative in the Netherlands.

M W J M Wouters1, M L E A Jansen-Landheer, C J H van de Velde.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 2007 the Dutch Cancer Society formed a 'Quality of Cancer Care' taskforce comprising medical specialists, from all disciplines involved in the care for cancer patients. This taskforce was charged with the evaluation of quality of cancer care in the Netherlands and the development of strategies for improvement.
OBJECTIVE: The experts first focused on the relation between procedural volume and patient outcome and later aimed to identify other factors associated with high and low quality of the care provided in different regions and (types of) hospitals in the Netherlands. The question if cancer care in the Netherlands could be organized differently to assure high quality of care for all patients, was the main subject of investigation.
METHODS: An extensive review of the literature on infrastructure, volume and specialization on the one hand and outcome on the other was performed. In addition, a meta-analysis of the volume-outcome relationship for pancreatectomies, bladder, lung, colorectal and breast cancer resections was performed. Finally, variation in quality of cancer care between regions, groups of hospitals and individual hospitals in our country was investigated on data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry.
RESULTS: In the Netherlands quality of care varies by hospital and region. These differences are not limited to surgical procedures and postoperative mortality, but are also demonstrated in other parts of the care process. Differences are only partly explained by differences in infrastructure, procedural volume and specialization between hospitals. Essential information on differences in case mix between these hospitals are lacking from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. More detailed clinical data are needed to reveal the mechanisms behind the differences in quality of care between Dutch hospitals.
CONCLUSION: On a population level, there is potential for improvement of outcome for cancer patients in the Netherlands by reducing variation in optimal treatment rates between hospitals. Not only treatment of tumours with a low incidence but also other complex or high risk cancer procedures should be provided in a specialized setting, with the right infrastructure, sufficient volume and adequate expertise. In addition, outcomes should be monitored continuously and fed back to individual caregivers. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20576399     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2010.06.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol        ISSN: 0748-7983            Impact factor:   4.424


  9 in total

1.  Patterns of care for brachytherapy in Europe: updated results for Spain.

Authors:  Ferran Guedea; José López-Torrecilla; Bradley Londres; Montse Ventura; Pedro Bilbao; Josep M Borràs
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 3.405

2.  Nonclinical Factors Associated with 30-Day Mortality after Lung Cancer Resection: An Analysis of 215,000 Patients Using the National Cancer Data Base.

Authors:  John N Melvan; Manu S Sancheti; Theresa Gillespie; Dana C Nickleach; Yuan Liu; Kristin Higgins; Suresh Ramalingam; Joseph Lipscomb; Felix G Fernandez
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 6.113

3.  Identification of the clinically most relevant postoperative complications after gastrectomy: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Emma C Gertsen; Lucas Goense; Hylke J F Brenkman; Richard van Hillegersberg; Jelle P Ruurda
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 7.370

Review 4.  Patient-Related Prognostic Factors for Anastomotic Leakage, Major Complications, and Short-Term Mortality Following Esophagectomy for Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.

Authors:  Robert T van Kooten; Daan M Voeten; Ewout W Steyerberg; Henk H Hartgrink; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Richard van Hillegersberg; Rob A E M Tollenaar; Michel W J M Wouters
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-09-05       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  Conventional regression analysis and machine learning in prediction of anastomotic leakage and pulmonary complications after esophagogastric cancer surgery.

Authors:  Robert T van Kooten; Renu R Bahadoer; Bouwdewijn Ter Buurkes de Vries; Michel W J M Wouters; Rob A E M Tollenaar; Henk H Hartgrink; Hein Putter; Johan L Dikken
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-05-03       Impact factor: 2.885

6.  Reducing persistent postoperative pain and disability 1 year after breast cancer surgery: a randomized, controlled trial comparing thoracic paravertebral block to local anesthetic infiltration.

Authors:  Michelle Chiu; Gregory L Bryson; Anne Lui; James M Watters; Monica Taljaard; Howard J Nathan
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2013-10-29       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  What drives centralisation in cancer care?

Authors:  Melvin J Kilsdonk; Sabine Siesling; Boukje A C van Dijk; Michel W Wouters; Wim H van Harten
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Quality and reporting of clinical guidelines for breast cancer treatment: A systematic review.

Authors:  Marta Maes-Carballo; Luciano Mignini; Manuel Martín-Díaz; Aurora Bueno-Cavanillas; Khalid Saeed Khan
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2020-08-10       Impact factor: 4.380

9.  Length of hospital stay after uncomplicated esophagectomy. Hospital variation shows room for nationwide improvement.

Authors:  Daan M Voeten; Leonie R van der Werf; Johanna W van Sandick; Richard van Hillegersberg; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-10-26       Impact factor: 4.584

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.