Improving the Quality of Rectal Cancer Care in the US: Is Accreditation Enough?

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


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 234-234
Author(s):  
Santiago Fontes ◽  
Megan Berry ◽  
Ana Marín-Jiménez ◽  
Juan Carlos Sánchez ◽  
Graciela Reyes ◽  
...  

234 Background: For years, rectal cancer has been considered a model oncologic entity and significant therapeutic improvements have been made in the last two decades. However, evidence suggests there are important differences in quality of care between countries, institutions and teams. Therefore, population-based audits are of great importance to ensure quality cancer care. Quality indicators (QIs) provide information on safety and quality of cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment. Aim: To describe and analyze quality indicators for diagnosis and treatment of rectal carcinoma at a high-volume cancer center in Uruguay. Methods: A retrospective descriptive study was performed as a sub-analysis of a cohort of 971 patients. A total of 497 rectal or rectosigmoid-junction carcinoma patients treated between 2008 and 2020 at the Uruguayan National Cancer Institute were included. Previously validated target values formed the basis of the QIs used in this study. Each QI was reported as the proportion (% 95% CI) of patients fulfilling the criteria out of eligible patients. Kaplan–Meier method was used to calculate overall survival rates. Results: Mean age was 62 years, 59.5% were male, and 78% showed no evidence of disseminated disease at diagnosis. Diagnosis and staging: combined contrast-enhanced CT TAP scan was performed in 66% of the sample, 51% of cases had a total colonoscopy before elective curative intent surgery. Locoregional c-TN staging was assessed by high resolution MRI in 64% of cases. Only 30% and 63% of patients in the preoperatively irradiated and the nonirradiated groups had a minimum of 12 lymph nodes examined. Multimodal treatment: preoperative chemo-radiation was delivered for stages II and III middle/low-third rectal cancers in 81% of the cases. Adjuvant therapy was prescribed in 75% and 47% of stages III and II receiving surgery as upfront treatment, respectively. 78% of cStage IV patients received palliative chemotherapy. Surrogate indicators of outcome: 82% had distal tumor-free margins, although only 72% had a pathological circumferential radial margin ((y)pCRM) mentioned in the pathology report. Non-curative (R1,2) resections in M0 rectal carcinoma in our cohort was below the target value of <20%. 15% of our cases had a positive (y)pCRM. Treatment-outcomes: Our cumulative overall local recurrence was 12.6% and the 3-year overall survival rate was 84.8%. Conclusions: Continuous analysis of QIs in rectal cancer is necessary for internal quality management and for external quality assessment, to improve and compare treatment outcomes. Our results highlight the positive aspects of rectal cancer care at our center and reveal the weak points in diagnosis and treatment that need special attention. They will serve as a guide in the implementation of new strategies and programs that will aim to improve safety and quality of rectal cancer care for Uruguayan patients, regardless of where they live or are treated.


Author(s):  
Quynh Le ◽  
Lorraine Shack ◽  
Adam Elwi ◽  
Francesca Coutinho ◽  
Ryan Rochon ◽  
...  

IntroductionDespite good overall care in Alberta Health Services the local recurrence rates are higher than what is accepted as standard of care for rectal cancer treatment. There are variations in pre-operative staging, application of best surgical techniques and pathological grading, use of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies, and in clinical reporting. Objectives and ApproachWe aimed at reducing the variations through the design and implementation of a provincial clinical pathway for rectal cancer by 2018. Our approaches included: 1) multidisciplinary tumor board consultation together with physician education sessions in reviewing standards of care and quality metrics; 2) data linkage and analysis based on chart reviews and extraction of data from Alberta Cancer Registry; and 3) production of provincial reports and individual feedbacks to physicians. CancerControl Alberta and Cancer Strategic Clinical Network collaborated in the linkage and analysis of data as well as mobilization oncology physicians to the initiative. ResultsA review of a set of metrics for producing individual and provincial feedback reports to rectal cancer physicians. The set has 24 key quality metrics includes five, four, eight, and six metrics for radiologists, pathologists, oncologists, and surgeons respectively. Thirty-two surgeons have received individual physician feedback reports. Feedback reports for radiologist, pathologist and oncologist are being finalized with input from key opinion leaders in each physician group. Key impacts to the quality of rectal cancer diagnosis, treatment, and care between 2013 and 2015 include increases in use of rectal cancer pre-operative MRIs for curative resections (+23%), completeness of synoptic MRI reports for pre-operative MRIs (+21%), grade 3 TME of curative resections (+4%), and pathologic reporting of TME assessments (+2%). Conclusion/ImplicationsPhysician feedback report system will enable the Alberta rectal cancer community to sustain the results and address strategies to continuously enhance the quality of rectal cancer care and survival. We recommend ongoing annual dissemination of feedback reports to support continuous improvement of rectal cancer care.


10.2196/15535 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e15535
Author(s):  
Amandeep Pooni ◽  
Selina Schmocker ◽  
Carl Brown ◽  
Anthony MacLean ◽  
Lara Williams ◽  
...  

Background Over the last 2 decades, the use of multimodal strategies, including total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery, preoperative chemotherapy, multidisciplinary case conference, pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, and pathologic assessment using Quirke method, has led to significant improvements in oncologic outcomes for patients with rectal cancer. Although the literature supports claims on the effectiveness of these multimodal strategies, the uptake of these multimodal strategies varies considerably among centers, suggesting that the best evidence is not always implemented into clinical practice. Objective This study aims to perform a quality improvement initiative to (1) identify existing gaps in care for these multimodal strategies and (2) implement knowledge translation (KT) interventions to close these gaps to optimize quality of care for patients with rectal cancer across high-volume centers in Canada. Methods Process indicators for the selected multimodal strategies to optimize rectal cancer care will be selected and prospectively collected for all patients with stages 1 to 3 rectal cancer undergoing TME surgery. KT interventions, including audit and feedback, opinion leaders, and community of practice, will be implemented to increase the uptake of these clinical strategies. Results The uptake of the process indicators over time and the effect of the uptake of the process indicators on short- and long-term oncologic outcomes will be evaluated for each multimodal strategy. Conclusions This quality improvement initiative will identify existing gaps in care for the selected multimodal strategies and implement KT interventions to close these gaps. The results of this study will inform further efforts to optimize rectal cancer care. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/15535


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document