Literature DB >> 28682683

Setting Quality Improvement Priorities for Women Receiving Systemic Therapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer by Using Population-Level Administrative Data.

Katherine A Enright1, Nathan Taback1, Melanie Lynn Powis1, Alejandro Gonzalez1, Lingsong Yun1, Rinku Sutradhar1, Maureen E Trudeau1, Christopher M Booth1, Monika K Krzyzanowska1.   

Abstract

Purpose Routine evaluation of quality measures (QMs) can drive improvement in cancer systems by highlighting gaps in care. Targeting quality improvement at QMs that demonstrate substantial variation has the potential to make the largest impact at the population level. We developed an approach that uses both variation in performance and number of patients affected by the QM to set priorities for improving the quality of systemic therapy for women with early-stage breast cancer (EBC). Patients and Methods Patients with EBC diagnosed from 2006 to 2010 in Ontario, Canada, were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry and linked deterministically to multiple health care databases. Individual QMs within a panel of 15 QMs previously developed to assess the quality of systemic therapy across four domains (access, treatment delivery, toxicity, and safety) were ranked on interinstitutional variation in performance (using interquartile range) and the number of patients who were affected; then the two rankings were averaged for a summative priority ranking. Results We identified 28,427 patients with EBC who were treated at 84 institutions. The use of computerized physician electronic order entry for chemotherapy, emergency room visits or hospitalizations during chemotherapy, and timely receipt of chemotherapy were identified as the QMs that had the largest potential to improve quality of care at a system level within this cohort. Conclusion A simple ranking system based on interinstitutional variation in performance and patient volume can be used to identify high-priority areas for quality improvement from a population perspective. This approach is generalizable to other health care systems that use QMs to drive improvement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28682683     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.70.7950

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  4 in total

1.  Athletic Trainers' Effect on Population Health: Improving Access to and Quality of Care.

Authors:  Ellen Shanley; Charles A Thigpen; Cole G Chapman; John Thorpe; Robert G Gilliland; W Franklin Sease
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 2.860

2.  Breast Cancer Care in South India: Is Practice Concordant With National Guidelines?

Authors:  D K Vijaykumar; Sujana Arun; Aswin G Abraham; Wilma Hopman; Andrew G Robinson; Christopher M Booth
Journal:  J Glob Oncol       Date:  2019-07

3.  Use of Electronic Administrative Databases to Measure Quality Indicators of Breast Cancer Care: Experience of Five Regional Oncology Networks in Italy.

Authors:  Valentina Guarneri; Paolo Pronzato; Oscar Bertetto; Fausto Roila; Gianni Amunni; Alberto Bortolami; Sandro Tognazzo; Gaia Griguolo; Eva Pagano; Fabrizio Stracci; Fortunato Bianconi; Fabrizio Gemmi; Letizia Bachini; Giovannino Ciccone; Gabriella Paoli; Laura Paleari; Pier Franco Conte
Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract       Date:  2019-12-19

4.  Evaluation of Reliability and Correlations of Quality Measures in Cancer Care.

Authors:  Nancy L Keating; Jessica L F Cleveland; Alexi A Wright; Gabriel A Brooks; Laurie Meneades; Lauren Riedel; Jose R Zubizarreta; Mary Beth Landrum
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-03-01
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.