Literature DB >> 24839592

Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: The Critical Role of Quality Measurement.

Tracy Spinks, Patricia A Ganz, George W Sledge, Laura Levit, James A Hayman, Timothy J Eberlein, Thomas W Feeley.   

Abstract

In 1999, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) published Ensuring Quality Cancer Care, an influential report that described an ideal cancer care system and issued ten recommendations to address pervasive gaps in the understanding and delivery of quality cancer care. Despite generating much fervor, the report's recommendations-including two recommendations related to quality measurement-remain largely unfulfilled. Amidst continuing concerns regarding increasing costs and questionable quality of care, the IOM charged a new committee with revisiting the 1999 report and with reassessing national cancer care, with a focus on the aging US population. The committee identified high-quality patient-clinician relationships and interactions as central drivers of quality and attributed existing quality gaps, in part, to the nation's inability to measure and improve cancer care delivery in a systematic way. In 2013, the committee published its findings in Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis, which included two recommendations that emphasize coordinated, patient-centered quality measurement and information technology enhancements: Develop a national quality reporting program for cancer care as part of a learning health care system; and,Develop an ethically sound learning health care information technology system for cancer that enables real-time analysis of data from cancer patients in a variety of care settings. These recommendations underscore the need for independent national oversight, public-private collaboration, and substantial funding to create robust, patient-centered quality measurement and learning enterprises to improve the quality, accessibility, and affordability of cancer care in America.

Entities:  

Year:  2014        PMID: 24839592      PMCID: PMC4021589          DOI: 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2013.11.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Healthc (Amst)        ISSN: 2213-0764


  36 in total

1.  Developing a reliable, valid, and feasible plan for quality-of-care measurement for cancer: how should we measure?

Authors:  Katherine L Kahn; Jennifer L Malin; John Adams; Patricia A Ganz
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Perioperative outcomes for laparoscopic and robotic compared with open prostatectomy using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database.

Authors:  Jen-Jane Liu; Bryan G Maxwell; Periklis Panousis; Benjamin I Chung
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2013-07-19       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Improving cancer care through public reporting of meaningful quality measures.

Authors:  Tracy E Spinks; Ronald Walters; Thomas W Feeley; Heidi Wied Albright; Victoria S Jordan; John Bingham; Thomas W Burke
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 6.301

4.  Analysis & commentary: A road map for improving the performance of performance measures.

Authors:  Peter J Pronovost; Richard Lilford
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 6.301

5.  Treatment patterns by decade of life in elderly women (> or =70 years of age) with ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Denise Uyar; Heidi E Frasure; Maurie Markman; Vivian E von Gruenigen
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 5.482

6.  Publicly reported quality-of-care measures influenced Wisconsin physician groups to improve performance.

Authors:  Geoffrey C Lamb; Maureen A Smith; William B Weeks; Christopher Queram
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 6.301

7.  Successful implementation of the Department of Veterans Affairs' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in the private sector: the Patient Safety in Surgery study.

Authors:  Shukri F Khuri; William G Henderson; Jennifer Daley; Olga Jonasson; R Scott Jones; Darrell A Campbell; Aaron S Fink; Robert M Mentzer; Leigh Neumayer; Karl Hammermeister; Cecilia Mosca; Nancy Healey
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Practice-based evidence to evidence-based practice: building the National Radiation Oncology Registry.

Authors:  Jason A Efstathiou; Deborah S Nassif; Todd R McNutt; C Bob Bogardus; Walter Bosch; Jeffrey Carlin; Ronald C Chen; Henry Chou; Dave Eggert; Benedick A Fraass; Joel Goldwein; Karen E Hoffman; Ken Hotz; Margie Hunt; Marc Kessler; Colleen A F Lawton; Charles Mayo; Jeff M Michalski; Sasa Mutic; Louis Potters; Christopher M Rose; Howard M Sandler; Gregory Sharp; Wolfgang Tomé; Phuoc T Tran; Terry Wall; Anthony L Zietman; Peter E Gabriel; Justin E Bekelman
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 3.840

9.  Barriers to clinical trial participation by older women with breast cancer.

Authors:  M Margaret Kemeny; Bercedis L Peterson; Alice B Kornblith; Hyman B Muss; Judith Wheeler; Ellis Levine; Nancy Bartlett; Gini Fleming; Harvey J Cohen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-06-15       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Risk analysis of early implant loss after immediate breast reconstruction: a review of 14,585 patients.

Authors:  John P Fischer; Ari M Wes; Charles T Tuggle; Joseph M Serletti; Liza C Wu
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2013-08-21       Impact factor: 6.113

View more
  8 in total

1.  Detecting unplanned care from clinician notes in electronic health records.

Authors:  Suzanne Tamang; Manali I Patel; Douglas W Blayney; Julie Kuznetsov; Samuel G Finlayson; Yohan Vetteth; Nigam Shah
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 3.840

2.  Adolescents and Young Adults with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia and Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Impact of Care at Specialized Cancer Centers on Survival Outcome.

Authors:  Julie Wolfson; Can-Lan Sun; Laura Wyatt; Wendy Stock; Smita Bhatia
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  Piecing together the puzzle of disparities in adolescents and young adults.

Authors:  Julie A Wolfson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Impact of care at comprehensive cancer centers on outcome: Results from a population-based study.

Authors:  Julie A Wolfson; Can-Lan Sun; Laura P Wyatt; Arti Hurria; Smita Bhatia
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Views of psycho-oncologists, physicians, and nurses on cancer care-A qualitative study.

Authors:  Berenike Steven; Lukas Lange; Holger Schulz; Christiane Bleich
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Assessing the transition from intravenous to subcutaneous delivery of rituximab: Benefits for payers, health care professionals, and patients with lymphoma.

Authors:  Michael J Harvey; Yi Zhong; Eric Morris; Jacob N Beverage; Robert S Epstein; Anita J Chawla
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Implementing a "free" tuberculosis (TB) care policy under the integrated model in Jiangsu, China: practices and costs in the real world.

Authors:  Xinxin Jia; Jiaying Chen; Siyuan Zhang; Bing Dai; Qian Long; Shenglan Tang
Journal:  Infect Dis Poverty       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 4.520

Review 8.  An Analysis of the Learning Health System in Its First Decade in Practice: Scoping Review.

Authors:  Jodyn E Platt; Minakshi Raj; Matthias Wienroth
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-03-19       Impact factor: 5.428

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.