BACKGROUND: There is a pressing demand for more accurate, disease-specific quality measures in the field of neurosurgery. Aiming at most adequately measuring and reflecting the quality of glioma therapy, we developed a novel quality indicator bundle in form of a checklist for all patients that are treated operatively for glioma. METHODS: On the basis of possible glioma-specific quality indicators retrieved from the literature and quality guidelines, a multidisciplinary team developed a checklist containing 13 patient-need-specific outcome measures. Subsequently, the checklist was prospectively applied to a total of 78 patients compared with a control group consisting of 322 patients. A score was generated based on the maximum of quality measures achieved. RESULTS: Significant improvements in quality after prospectively introducing the checklist were achieved for supplemental physical and occupational therapy during inpatient stay (89.4% vs 100%, P = .002), consultation of a social worker during inpatient stay (64% vs 92.3%, P < .001), psycho-oncological screening (14.3% vs 70.5%, P < .001), psycho-oncological consultation (31.1% vs 82.1%, P < .001), and consultation of the palliative care team (20% vs 40%, P = .031). Overall, after introduction of the checklist one-third (n = 23) of patients reached best-practice measures in all categories, and over half of the patients (n = 44) achieved above 90% with respect to the outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Aiming at ensuring comprehensive, consistent, and timely care of glioma patients, the implementation of the checklist for routine use in glioma surgery represents an efficient, easily reproducible, and powerful tool for significant improvements.
BACKGROUND: There is a pressing demand for more accurate, disease-specific quality measures in the field of neurosurgery. Aiming at most adequately measuring and reflecting the quality of glioma therapy, we developed a novel quality indicator bundle in form of a checklist for all patients that are treated operatively for glioma. METHODS: On the basis of possible glioma-specific quality indicators retrieved from the literature and quality guidelines, a multidisciplinary team developed a checklist containing 13 patient-need-specific outcome measures. Subsequently, the checklist was prospectively applied to a total of 78 patients compared with a control group consisting of 322 patients. A score was generated based on the maximum of quality measures achieved. RESULTS: Significant improvements in quality after prospectively introducing the checklist were achieved for supplemental physical and occupational therapy during inpatient stay (89.4% vs 100%, P = .002), consultation of a social worker during inpatient stay (64% vs 92.3%, P < .001), psycho-oncological screening (14.3% vs 70.5%, P < .001), psycho-oncological consultation (31.1% vs 82.1%, P < .001), and consultation of the palliative care team (20% vs 40%, P = .031). Overall, after introduction of the checklist one-third (n = 23) of patients reached best-practice measures in all categories, and over half of the patients (n = 44) achieved above 90% with respect to the outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Aiming at ensuring comprehensive, consistent, and timely care of glioma patients, the implementation of the checklist for routine use in glioma surgery represents an efficient, easily reproducible, and powerful tool for significant improvements.
Authors: Emily S Patterson; Emilie M Roth; David D Woods; Renée Chow; José Orlando Gomes Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: Benjamin W Lamb; Katrina F Brown; Kamal Nagpal; Charles Vincent; James S A Green; Nick Sevdalis Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-03-26 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Iahn Cajigas; Anil K Mahavadi; Ashish H Shah; Veronica Borowy; Nathalie Abitbol; Michael E Ivan; Ricardo J Komotar; Richard H Epstein Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2019-10-22 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Jennifer S Temel; Joseph A Greer; Alona Muzikansky; Emily R Gallagher; Sonal Admane; Vicki A Jackson; Constance M Dahlin; Craig D Blinderman; Juliet Jacobsen; William F Pirl; J Andrew Billings; Thomas J Lynch Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-08-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David N Louis; Arie Perry; Guido Reifenberger; Andreas von Deimling; Dominique Figarella-Branger; Webster K Cavenee; Hiroko Ohgaki; Otmar D Wiestler; Paul Kleihues; David W Ellison Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Sebastian Lohmann; Tobias Brix; Julian Varghese; Nils Warneke; Michael Schwake; Eric Suero Molina; Markus Holling; Walter Stummer; Stephanie Schipmann Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2020-03-20 Impact factor: 5.115