Literature DB >> 34001080

A preliminary assessment of guideline adherence and clinical variation in oral cancer treatment: a MarketScan database study.

Antoine Eskander1, Axel Sahovaler2, Jennifer Shin3, Konrado Deutsch2, Matthew Crowson2, Neerav Goyal4, David L Witsell5, Kristine Schulz5, Neil D Gross6, Randal Weber6, Samir S Khariwala7, Seth Cohen5, Derek Walter CyrLee5,8, Vikas Mehta9.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To assess variations in adherence to guideline-recommended processes of care for oral cavity cancer patients.
METHODS: Retrospective study using a U.S. healthcare research database (MarketScan). Index diagnoses were considered from 2010 to 2012 with follow-up from 2013 to 2014. Diagnostic and procedure codes were utilized to identify oral cavity patients with a defined treatment modality. Compliance with guideline-recommended processes of care, which included pre-treatment imaging, thyroid-function testing (TFTs), multidisciplinary consultation and gastrostomy-tube insertion rates, were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 2752 patients were identified. Surgery alone was the most common treatment (60.8%), followed by surgery with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (20.4%) and surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy (18.8%). Head/neck and chest imaging were obtained in 60% and 62.5% of patients respectively. Significant geographical differences in head and neck imaging were observed between North-central (64%), South (58.4%) and West (56.1%) regions (p = 0.026). Differences in chest imaging were also present between North-east (65%) and West (56.8%; p = 0.007). TFTs were obtained in 54.4% of the patients after radiation treatment, and 18.6% of patients had multidisciplinary consultation during the 6 months before and 3 months after initiation of treatment. During the year after treatment initiation, 21.2% of patients underwent G-tube placement, with significantly higher rates in patients receiving triple modality treatment (58%) when compared to surgery plus radiation (27%) and surgery alone (15%; p < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Adherence to evidence-based practices was low based on the database coding. These data suggest a potential to improve adherence and increase the routine use of practices delineated in national clinical practice guidelines. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study reflects a suboptimal adherence to guidelines based on the database employed. This study should be considered by healthcare providers and efforts should be maximized to follow the processes of care which have proven to impact on patient's outcomes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Guideline-recommended processes of care; MarketScan; Oral cavity carcinoma

Year:  2021        PMID: 34001080     DOI: 10.1186/s12903-021-01616-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Oral Health        ISSN: 1472-6831            Impact factor:   2.757


  23 in total

1.  Adherence to guideline-recommended process measures for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in Ontario: Impact of surgeon and hospital volume.

Authors:  Antoine Eskander; Eric Monteiro; Jonathan Irish; Patrick Gullane; Ralph Gilbert; John de Almeida; Dale Brown; Jeremy Freeman; David R Urbach; David P Goldstein
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 3.147

2.  The Importance and Challenges of a Specialty-Specific National Surgical Quality Improvement Program for Head and Neck Surgery.

Authors:  Jonathan Irish; Antoine Eskander
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 6.223

3.  Compliance with quality assurance measures in patients treated for early oral tongue cancer.

Authors:  Amy C Hessel; Mauricio A Moreno; Ehab Y Hanna; Dianna B Roberts; Jan S Lewin; Adel K El-Naggar; David I Rosenthal; Randal S Weber
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-07-15       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 4.  Radiation-induced hypothyroidism in head and neck cancer patients: a systematic review.

Authors:  Marjolein J Boomsma; Hendrik P Bijl; Johannes A Langendijk
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2011-04-01       Impact factor: 6.280

5.  Quality indicators of laryngeal cancer care in commercially insured patients.

Authors:  Christopher J Britt; Hsien-Yen Chang; Harry Quon; Hyunseok Kang; Ana P Kiess; David W Eisele; Kevin D Frick; Christine G Gourin
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2017-07-08       Impact factor: 3.325

6.  Long-term toxicities in 10-year survivors of radiation treatment for head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Yanqun Dong; John A Ridge; Tianyu Li; Miriam N Lango; Thomas M Churilla; Jessica R Bauman; Thomas J Galloway
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2017-06-23       Impact factor: 5.337

7.  Treatment, short-term outcomes, and costs associated with larynx cancer care in commercially insured patients.

Authors:  Andrew T Day; Hsien-Yen Chang; Harry Quon; Hyunseok Kang; Ana P Kiess; David W Eisele; Kevin D Frick; Christine G Gourin
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2017-07-07       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  A user's manual for the IOM's 'Quality Chasm' report.

Authors:  Donald M Berwick
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 6.301

9.  Impact of tumor board recommendations on treatment outcome for locally advanced head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Nam P Nguyen; Paul Vos; Howard Lee; Thomas L Borok; Ulf Karlsson; Tomas Martinez; James Welsh; Deirdre Cohen; Russell Hamilton; Nga Nguyen; Ly M Nguyen; Vincent Vinh-Hung
Journal:  Oncology       Date:  2008-10-08       Impact factor: 2.935

10.  Volume-outcome relationships for head and neck cancer surgery in a universal health care system.

Authors:  Antoine Eskander; Jonathan Irish; Patti A Groome; Jeremy Freeman; Patrick Gullane; Ralph Gilbert; Stephen F Hall; David R Urbach; David P Goldstein
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2014-06-03       Impact factor: 3.325

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.