PURPOSE: Quality improvement programs in Europe have had a markedly beneficial effect on the processes and outcomes of rectal cancer care. The quality of rectal cancer care in the United States is not as well understood, and scalable quality improvement programs have not been developed. The purpose of this article is to describe the implementation of a hospital-based quality assessment program for rectal cancer, targeting both community and academic hospitals. METHODS: We recruited 10 hospitals from a surgical quality improvement organization. Nurse reviewers were trained to abstract rectal cancer data from hospital medical records, and abstracts were assessed for accuracy. We conducted two surveys to assess the training program and limitations of the data abstraction. We validated data completeness and accuracy by comparing hospital medical record and tumor registry data. RESULTS: Nine of 10 hospitals successfully performed abstractions with ≥ 90% accuracy. Experienced nurse reviewers were challenged by the technical details in operative and pathology reports. Although most variables had less than 10% missing data, outpatient testing information was lacking from some hospitals' inpatient records. This implementation project yielded a final quality assessment program consisting of 20 medical records variables and 11 tumor registry variables. CONCLUSION: An innovative program linking tumor registry data to quality-improvement data for rectal cancer quality assessment was successfully implemented in 10 hospitals. This data platform and training program can serve as a template for other organizations that are interested in assessing and improving the quality of rectal cancer care.
PURPOSE: Quality improvement programs in Europe have had a markedly beneficial effect on the processes and outcomes of rectal cancer care. The quality of rectal cancer care in the United States is not as well understood, and scalable quality improvement programs have not been developed. The purpose of this article is to describe the implementation of a hospital-based quality assessment program for rectal cancer, targeting both community and academic hospitals. METHODS: We recruited 10 hospitals from a surgical quality improvement organization. Nurse reviewers were trained to abstract rectal cancer data from hospital medical records, and abstracts were assessed for accuracy. We conducted two surveys to assess the training program and limitations of the data abstraction. We validated data completeness and accuracy by comparing hospital medical record and tumor registry data. RESULTS: Nine of 10 hospitals successfully performed abstractions with ≥ 90% accuracy. Experienced nurse reviewers were challenged by the technical details in operative and pathology reports. Although most variables had less than 10% missing data, outpatient testing information was lacking from some hospitals' inpatient records. This implementation project yielded a final quality assessment program consisting of 20 medical records variables and 11 tumor registry variables. CONCLUSION: An innovative program linking tumor registry data to quality-improvement data for rectal cancer quality assessment was successfully implemented in 10 hospitals. This data platform and training program can serve as a template for other organizations that are interested in assessing and improving the quality of rectal cancer care.
Authors: E Kapiteijn; C A Marijnen; I D Nagtegaal; H Putter; W H Steup; T Wiggers; H J Rutten; L Pahlman; B Glimelius; J H van Krieken; J W Leer; C J van de Velde Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-08-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael J Englesbe; Justin B Dimick; Christopher J Sonnenday; David A Share; Darrell A Campbell Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Darrell A Campbell; William G Henderson; Michael J Englesbe; Bruce L Hall; Michael O'Reilly; Dale Bratzler; E Patchen Dellinger; Leigh Neumayer; Barbara L Bass; Matthew M Hutter; James Schwartz; Clifford Ko; Kamal Itani; Steven M Steinberg; Allan Siperstein; Robert G Sawyer; Douglas J Turner; Shukri F Khuri Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2008-10-10 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Dorothy Romanus; Martin R Weiser; John M Skibber; Anna Ter Veer; Joyce C Niland; John L Wilson; Ashwani Rajput; Yu-Ning Wong; Al B Benson; Stephen Shibata; Deborah Schrag Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Phil Quirke; Robert Steele; John Monson; Robert Grieve; Subhash Khanna; Jean Couture; Chris O'Callaghan; Arthur Sun Myint; Eric Bessell; Lindsay C Thompson; Mahesh Parmar; Richard J Stephens; David Sebag-Montefiore Journal: Lancet Date: 2009-03-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Arielle E Kanters; Robert K Cleary; Shawn H Obi; Theodor Asgeirsson; Sarah K Evilsizer; Laurie G Fasbinder; Darrell A Campbell; Samantha K Hendren Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 4.412