Evaluating the effect of clinical care pathways on quality of cancer care: analysis of breast, colon and rectal cancer pathways

2016 ◽  
Vol 142 (5) ◽  
pp. 1079-1089 ◽  
Author(s):  
Han Bao ◽  
Fengjuan Yang ◽  
Shaofei Su ◽  
Xinyu Wang ◽  
Meiqi Zhang ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (03) ◽  
pp. 260-263
Author(s):  
Monica Irukulla ◽  
Palwai Vinitha Reddy

AbstractOutcomes in cancer patients are strongly influenced by timeliness and quality of multidisciplinary interventions. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to severe disruption in cancer care in many countries. This has necessitated several changes in clinical care and workflow, including resource allocation, team segregation and deferment of many elective procedures. Several international oncological societies have proposed guidelines for the care of patients afflicted with breast cancer during the pandemic with a view to optimize resource allocation and maximize risk versus benefit for the individual and society. Clinicians may utilize these recommendations to adapt patient care, based on the current availability of resources and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in each region. This article discusses the guidelines for care of patients afflicted with breast cancer during the pandemic.


2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (7) ◽  
pp. 926.e1-926.e11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Talevski ◽  
Kerrie M. Sanders ◽  
Gustavo Duque ◽  
Catherine Connaughton ◽  
Alison Beauchamp ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 227 (4) ◽  
pp. S150
Author(s):  
Kerui Xu ◽  
Charles W. Acher ◽  
Nick A. Zaborek ◽  
Jessica R. Schumacher ◽  
Elise H. Lawson
Keyword(s):  

2008 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-48
Author(s):  
G. Marino ◽  
M. Laudi ◽  
L. Capussotti ◽  
P. Zola

Introduction. During the last 30 years, the multidisciplinary treatments of colon and uterus neoplasm have yielded an increase in total survival rates, fostering therefore the increase of cases with regional relapse involving the urinary tract. In these cases the iterative surgery can be performed, if no disease secondary to pelvic pain, haemostatic or debulking procedure is present, and must be considered and discussed with the patient, according to his/her general status. Materials and Methods. From 1997 to August 2007 we performed altogether 43 pelvic iterative surgeries, with simultaneous urologic surgical procedure because of pelvic tumor relapse in patients with uterus neoplasm and colon and rectal cancer. In 4 cases of anal cancer, the urological procedure were: one radical prostatectomy with continent vesicostomy in the first case, while in the other 3 cases radical pelvectomy with double-barrelled uretero-cutaneostomy In 23 cases of colon cancer, the urologic procedures were: 9 cases of radical cystectomy with double-barrelled uretero-cutaneostomy, 4 cases of radical cystectomy with uretero-ileo-cutaneostomy according to Bricker-Wallace II procedure, and 9 cases of partial cystectomy with pelvic ureterectomy and ureterocystoneostomy according to Lich-Gregoire technique (7 cases) and Lembo-Boari (2 cases) procedure. In 16 cases of uterus cancer, the urological procedure were: 7 cases of partial cystectomy with pelvic ureterectomy and uretero-cystoneostomy according to Lich-Gregoire procedure; in 3 cases, a radical cystectomy with urinary continent cutaneous diversion according to the Ileal T-pouch procedure; 2 cases of total pelvectomy and double uretero-cutaneostomy, and 4 cases of bilateral uretero-cutaneostomy. Results. No patients died in the perioperative time; early systemic complications were: 2 esophageal candidiasis, 1 case of venous thrombosis. Conclusions. The iterative pelvic surgery in the case of oncological relapse involving the urinary tract aims to achieve the best quality of life with the utmost oncological radicality. The equation: eradication of pelvic neoplasm and urinary tract reconstruction, with acceptable quality of life, will be the future target; nevertheless, it is not possible to establish guidelines beforehand, and the therapy must be adapted to each single case.


2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (25) ◽  
pp. 6233-6239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael N. Neuss ◽  
Christopher E. Desch ◽  
Kristen K. McNiff ◽  
Peter D. Eisenberg ◽  
Dean H. Gesme ◽  
...  

Purpose The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) is a practice-based system of quality self-assessment sponsored by the participants and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). The process of quality evaluation, development of the pilot questionnaire, and preliminary results are reported. Methods Physicians from seven oncology groups developed medical record abstraction measures based on practice guidelines and consensus-supported indicators of quality care. Each practice completed two rounds of records review and received practice and aggregate results. Mean frequencies of responses for each indicator were compared among practices. Results Participants universally, if informally, find QOPI helpful, and results show statistically significant variation among practices for several indicators, including assessing pain in patients close to death, documentation of informed consent for chemotherapy, and concordance with granulocytic and erythroid growth factor administration guidelines. Measures with universally high concordance include the use of serotonin antagonist antiemetics according to the ASCO guideline; the presence of a pathology report in the record; the use of chemotherapy flow sheets; and adherence to standard chemotherapy recommendations for patients with certain stages of breast, colon, and rectal cancer. Concordance with quality indicators significantly changed between survey rounds for several measures. Conclusion Pilot results indicate that the QOPI process provides a rapid and objective measurement of practice quality that allows comparisons among practices and over time. It also provides a mechanism for measuring concordance with published guidelines. Most importantly, it provides a tool for practice self-examination that can promote excellence in cancer care.


2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. e120-e129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Hendren ◽  
Ellen McKeown ◽  
Arden M. Morris ◽  
Sandra L. Wong ◽  
Mary Oerline ◽  
...  

A program linking tumor registry data to quality-improvement data for rectal cancer quality assessment was successfully implemented in 10 hospitals. This program can serve as a template for organizations interested in improving the quality of rectal cancer care.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 670-670
Author(s):  
Laurence E. McCahill ◽  
Jamie Kokko ◽  
Chris Werkemma ◽  
Pierson Ebrom ◽  
Sarat Khandavalli

670 Background: Institute of Medicine report calls for improved quality of cancer care. Numerous entities have sought measures of health care quality, but there is limited consensus regarding metrics for quality of colorectal cancer (CRC) care. Current measures are very limited; there exist no comprehensive metrics for quality of CRC care across the continuum of care. We sought to identify robust quality metrics, including measures related to pathology, coordination of cancer care, surgery, radiation, chemotherapy and surveillance, in order to identify gaps in quality of CRC care. Methods: National guidelines (NCCN and ASCO), National Quality Forum, and select peer reviewed publications were reviewed to develop evidence based metrics to assess quality of CRC care from diagnosis to post treatment surveillance and survivorship. A core group of health care providers, including a surgical oncologist, a pathologist and a Cancer nurse practitioner developed the metrics based on literature review. Measures were reviewed by key physician stakeholders including Radiation Oncology, Medical Oncology, General surgery, and Gastroenterology to obtain support for the quality initiative at our institution. Results: Twenty-three quality metrics were developed including 6 metrics related to access and process, 6 related to pathology, 7 related to multidisciplinary care and 4 measures related to surveillance and survivorship. Novel metrics included documentation of a three generational cancer family history, documentation of preoperative CT imaging of chest/abdomen/pelvis, MSI and KRAS testing in specific populations, appropriate pre-operative radiation oncologist evaluation for rectal cancer, multidisciplinary team planning prior to treatment initiation for rectal cancer and patients with newly identified liver metastases, appropriate referral for genetic counseling and surveillance annual CT scans for 3 years post treatment. Conclusions: These novel and comprehensive metrics allow for detailed review of the quality of CRC care received by patients at our institution. Individual patient data are currently being abstracted to assess the utility and logistics of implementing these quality metrics at a community cancer center.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document