Robert A Olson1, Manpreet Tiwana2, Mark Barnes3, Eric Cai4, Colleen McGahan4, Kelsey Roden5, Emily Yurkowski6, Quinn Gentles5, John French7, Ross Halperin8, Ivo A Olivotto9. 1. BC Cancer Agency-Centre for the North, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada; University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada; University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: rolson2@bccancer.bc.ca. 2. BC Cancer Agency-Centre for the North, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada; University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada; University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 3. BC Cancer Agency-Centre for the North, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada. 4. BC Cancer Agency Research Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 5. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 6. University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada. 7. BC Cancer Agency-Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 8. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; BC Cancer Agency-Centre for the Southern Interior, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada. 9. University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the impact of a population-based intervention to increase the consistency and use of single-fraction radiation therapy (SFRT) for bone metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In 2012, an audit of radiation therapy prescriptions for bone metastases in British Columbia identified significant interphysician and -center (26%-73%) variation in the use of SFRT. Anonymous physician-level and identifiable regional cancer center SFRT use data were presented to all radiation oncologists, together with published guidelines, meta-analyses, and recommendations from practice leaders. The use of SFRT for bone metastases from 2007 through 2011 was compared with use of SFRT in 2013, to assess the impact of the audit and educational intervention. Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between the usage of SFRT and the timing of the radiation while controlling for potentially confounding variables. Physician and center were included as group effects to account for the clustered structure of the data. RESULTS: A total of 16,898 courses of RT were delivered from 2007 through 2011, and 3200 courses were delivered in 2013. The rates of SFRT use in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2013 were 50.5%, 50.9%, 48.3%, 48.5%, 48.0%, and 59.7%, respectively (P<.001). Use of SFRT increased in each of 5 regional centers: A: 26% to 32%; B: 36% to 56%; C: 39% to 57%; D: 49% to 56%; and E: 73% to 85.0%. Use of SFRT was more consistent; 3 of 5 centers used SFRT for 56% to 57% of bone metastases RT courses. The regression analysis showed strong evidence that the usage of SFRT increased after the 2012 intervention (odds ratio 2.27, 95% confidence interval 2.06-2.50, P<.0001). CONCLUSION: Assessed on a population basis, an audit-based intervention increased utilization of SFRT for bone metastases. The intervention reversed a trend to decreasing SFRT use, reduced costs, and improved patient convenience. This suggests that dissemination of programmatic quality indicators in oncology can lead to increased utilization of evidence-based practice.
PURPOSE: To assess the impact of a population-based intervention to increase the consistency and use of single-fraction radiation therapy (SFRT) for bone metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In 2012, an audit of radiation therapy prescriptions for bone metastases in British Columbia identified significant interphysician and -center (26%-73%) variation in the use of SFRT. Anonymous physician-level and identifiable regional cancer center SFRT use data were presented to all radiation oncologists, together with published guidelines, meta-analyses, and recommendations from practice leaders. The use of SFRT for bone metastases from 2007 through 2011 was compared with use of SFRT in 2013, to assess the impact of the audit and educational intervention. Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between the usage of SFRT and the timing of the radiation while controlling for potentially confounding variables. Physician and center were included as group effects to account for the clustered structure of the data. RESULTS: A total of 16,898 courses of RT were delivered from 2007 through 2011, and 3200 courses were delivered in 2013. The rates of SFRT use in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2013 were 50.5%, 50.9%, 48.3%, 48.5%, 48.0%, and 59.7%, respectively (P<.001). Use of SFRT increased in each of 5 regional centers: A: 26% to 32%; B: 36% to 56%; C: 39% to 57%; D: 49% to 56%; and E: 73% to 85.0%. Use of SFRT was more consistent; 3 of 5 centers used SFRT for 56% to 57% of bone metastases RT courses. The regression analysis showed strong evidence that the usage of SFRT increased after the 2012 intervention (odds ratio 2.27, 95% confidence interval 2.06-2.50, P<.0001). CONCLUSION: Assessed on a population basis, an audit-based intervention increased utilization of SFRT for bone metastases. The intervention reversed a trend to decreasing SFRT use, reduced costs, and improved patient convenience. This suggests that dissemination of programmatic quality indicators in oncology can lead to increased utilization of evidence-based practice.
Authors: J O Kim; N Hanumanthappa; Y T Chung; J Beck; R Koul; B Bashir; A Cooke; A Dubey; J Butler; M Nashed; W Hunter; A Ong Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Benjamin W Fischer-Valuck; Brian C Baumann; Anthony Apicelli; Yuan James Rao; Michael Roach; Mackenzie Daly; Maria C Dans; Patrick White; Jessika Contreras; Lauren Henke; Hiram Gay; Jeff M Michalski; Christopher Abraham Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2018-08-17 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Robert A Olson; Vincent LaPointe; Alex Benny; Matthew Chan; Shilo Lefresne; Michael McKenzie Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2022-03-18 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Costanza M Donati; Elena Nardi; Erika Galietta; Maria L Alfieri; Giambattista Siepe; Alice Zamagni; Milly Buwenge; Gabriella Macchia; Francesco Deodato; Savino Cilla; Lidia Strigari; Silvia Cammelli; Francesco Cellini; Alessio G Morganti Journal: Clin Med Insights Oncol Date: 2021-07-22