Literature DB >> 23718934

Reporting of quality measures in gynecologic oncology programs at Prospective Payment System (PPS)-Exempt Cancer Hospitals: an early glimpse into a challenging initiative.

David E Cohn1, Mario Leitao, Charles Levenback, Ross Berkowitz, Lynda Roman, Joseph Lucci, Sarah Kim, Johnathon Lancaster, Kunle Odunsi, Mark Wakabayashi, Barbara A Goff.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The Affordable Care Act mandates the Prospective Payment System (PPS)-Exempt Cancer Hospitals Quality Reporting program. These 11 hospitals (which are paid fee-for-service rather than on a DRG system) began reporting measures (2 general safety, 2 breast, 1 colon) in 2013. Given this reporting mandate, we set out to determine whether the PPS-exempt gynecologic oncology programs could identify quality measures specific to the care of our patients.
METHODS: A list of 12 quality measures specific to gynecologic oncology was created (from sources including the National Quality Forum and the SGO). Measures already in use were not included. The list was ranked by the gynecologic oncology program directors at the PPS-exempt hospitals. Descriptive statistics (including mean and SD for rankings) were utilized.
RESULTS: Despite mandatory reporting of quality measures for PPS-exempt cancer hospitals, little consensus exists regarding specific gynecologic cancer measures. Documentation of debulking status, cancer survival, and offering minimally invasive surgery (for endometrial cancer) and intraperitoneal chemotherapy (for ovarian cancer) are important, but with widely variable responses (when ranked 1-12, standard deviations are 2-3). General issues regarding adherence to guidelines for the use of GCSF, documentation of functional status, and tracking of patient satisfaction scores were ranked the lowest. Three of the directors reported that their compensation is partially linked to quality outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: There is wide variability in ranking of quality measures, and may relate to provider or institutional factors. Despite the mandatory reporting in PPS-exempt cancer hospitals, work remains to define gynecologic cancer quality measures.
Copyright © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Affordable Care Act; PPS-exempt; Quality measures

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23718934     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.05.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  3 in total

1.  Defining the value framework for prostate brachytherapy using patient-centered outcome metrics and time-driven activity-based costing.

Authors:  Nikhil G Thaker; Thomas J Pugh; Usama Mahmood; Seungtaek Choi; Tracy E Spinks; Neil E Martin; Terence T Sio; Rajat J Kudchadker; Robert S Kaplan; Deborah A Kuban; David A Swanson; Peter F Orio; Michael J Zelefsky; Brett W Cox; Louis Potters; Thomas A Buchholz; Thomas W Feeley; Steven J Frank
Journal:  Brachytherapy       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 2.362

2.  Evaluation of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Universal Surgical Risk Calculator for a gynecologic oncology service.

Authors:  J Brian Szender; Peter J Frederick; Kevin H Eng; Stacey N Akers; Shashikant B Lele; Kunle Odunsi
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.437

3.  Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) scores and gynecologic oncology surgical outcomes.

Authors:  Joseph A Dottino; Weiguo He; Charlotte C Sun; Hui Zhao; Shuangshuang Fu; Karen H Lu; Larissa A Meyer
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2019-06-14       Impact factor: 5.482

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.