BACKGROUND: We sought to assess the feasibility of applying Cancer Care Ontario's quality of care indicators to a single institution's colorectal cancer (CRC) database. We also sought to assess their utility in identifying areas that require improvement. METHODS: We included patients who had surgery for CRC between 1997 and 2006 at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ont. We excluded patients who had transanal excisions, carcinoma in situ or recurrences that required pelvic exenteration, as well as those whose information was incomplete. We obtained data from a prospective database and verified the data with hospital and office charts. We evaluated trends over a 10-year period using the Cochran-Armitage trend test. RESULTS: During the study period there were 1005 surgical procedures performed in 987 patients with a mean age of 65.6 (standard deviation 15) years; the male:female ratio was 1:2. The most frequent tumour sites were the rectum and sigmoid colon (68%). Over the 10-year period, 9 indicators improved, including the proportion of patients with CRC identified by screening (p < 0.001), the proportion of patients who received preoperative liver imaging (p = 0.05), the proportion of rectal cancer patients who received preoperative pelvic imaging (p = 0.04), the proportion of patients with stage II or III rectal cancer who received radiotherapy (p = 0.03), the proportion of surgical specimens with more than 12 lymph nodes (p < 0.001), the proportion of pathology reports that included quantitative distal (p = 0.004) and radial (p < 0.001) margin measurements, the proportion of patients with an anastomotic leak (p = 0.03), the proportion of patients who received a colonoscopy 1 year after surgery (p < 0.001) and the proportion of operative reports that were complete (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The use of quality of care indicators to assess the quality of colorectal surgery is feasible. This study provides benchmarks that can be used to assess changes in the quality of CRC care at our institution.
BACKGROUND: We sought to assess the feasibility of applying Cancer Care Ontario's quality of care indicators to a single institution's colorectal cancer (CRC) database. We also sought to assess their utility in identifying areas that require improvement. METHODS: We included patients who had surgery for CRC between 1997 and 2006 at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ont. We excluded patients who had transanal excisions, carcinoma in situ or recurrences that required pelvic exenteration, as well as those whose information was incomplete. We obtained data from a prospective database and verified the data with hospital and office charts. We evaluated trends over a 10-year period using the Cochran-Armitage trend test. RESULTS: During the study period there were 1005 surgical procedures performed in 987 patients with a mean age of 65.6 (standard deviation 15) years; the male:female ratio was 1:2. The most frequent tumour sites were the rectum and sigmoid colon (68%). Over the 10-year period, 9 indicators improved, including the proportion of patients with CRC identified by screening (p < 0.001), the proportion of patients who received preoperative liver imaging (p = 0.05), the proportion of rectal cancerpatients who received preoperative pelvic imaging (p = 0.04), the proportion of patients with stage II or III rectal cancer who received radiotherapy (p = 0.03), the proportion of surgical specimens with more than 12 lymph nodes (p < 0.001), the proportion of pathology reports that included quantitative distal (p = 0.004) and radial (p < 0.001) margin measurements, the proportion of patients with an anastomotic leak (p = 0.03), the proportion of patients who received a colonoscopy 1 year after surgery (p < 0.001) and the proportion of operative reports that were complete (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The use of quality of care indicators to assess the quality of colorectal surgery is feasible. This study provides benchmarks that can be used to assess changes in the quality of CRC care at our institution.
Authors: H Nelson; N Petrelli; A Carlin; J Couture; J Fleshman; J Guillem; B Miedema; D Ota; D Sargent Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2001-04-18 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Gershon Y Locker; Stanley Hamilton; Jules Harris; John M Jessup; Nancy Kemeny; John S Macdonald; Mark R Somerfield; Daniel F Hayes; Robert C Bast Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-10-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: C Lamberti; S Lundin; M Bogdanow; M Gorschlüter; I G Schmidt-Wolf; T Sauerbruch Journal: Dtsch Med Wochenschr Date: 2006-03-10 Impact factor: 0.628
Authors: Leonard B Saltz; Donna Niedzwiecki; Donna Hollis; Richard M Goldberg; Alexander Hantel; James P Thomas; Anthony L A Fields; Robert J Mayer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-08-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Trustin S Domes; Patrick H D Colquhoun; Brian Taylor; Jonathan I Izawa; Andrew A House; Patrick P W Luke; Jonathan I Izawa Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Erin M Siegel; Paul B Jacobsen; Mokenge Malafa; William Fulp; Michelle Fletcher; Ji-Hyun Lee; Jesusa Corazon R Smith; Richard Brown; Richard Levine; Thomas Cartwright; Guillermo Abesada-Terk; George Kim; Carlos Alemany; Douglas Faig; Philip Sharp; Merry-Jennifer Markham; David Shibata Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2012-06-12 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Erin M Siegel; Paul B Jacobsen; Ji-Hyun Lee; Mokenge Malafa; William Fulp; Michelle Fletcher; Jesusa Corazon R Smith; Richard Brown; Richard Levine; Thomas Cartwright; Guillermo Abesada-Terk; George Kim; Carlos Alemany; Douglas Faig; Philip Sharp; Merry-Jennifer Markham; David Shibata Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2013-11-23 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Ramzi M Helewa; Donna Turner; Debrah Wirtzfeld; Jason Park; David Hochman; Piotr Czaykowski; Harminder Singh; Emma Shu; Lin Xue; Andrew McKay Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2013-06-17 Impact factor: 2.754