Evaluation of Spanish hospitals participating in the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative program.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 222-222
Author(s):  
Rafael Lopez ◽  
Antonio Antón ◽  
Enrique Aranda ◽  
Alfredo Carrato ◽  
Manuel Constenla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Pathology Report ◽  
Tobacco Use Cessation ◽  
Counseling And Assessment ◽  
American Society ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Initiative Program

222 Background: Measuring and tracking quality of care is highly relevant in today’s healthcare. The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) program is a referral for evaluating oncology practices worldwide. The ECO Foundation (Excellence and Quality in Oncology), a collaboration of oncology experts from the major Spanish hospitals involved in cancer treatment, reached an agreement with ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) to include Spanish hospitals in its QOPI program. Methods: We analyzed the results of the QOPI core module measures from 19 Spanish hospitals submitting their data in nine rounds (from Fall 2015 to Fall 2019). Results: Of the 19 hospitals, 15 participated more than once; none participated in all 9 rounds (2 hospitals participated in 8 rounds). The highest scores were for pathology report confirming malignancy, documenting plan of care for moderate/severe pain and chemotherapy dose, and chemotherapy administered to patients with metastatic solid tumor with performance status undocumented. Measures regarding a summary of chemotherapy treatment, tobacco use cessation counseling, and assessment of patient emotional well-being were among the lowest scored measures. Six of the 15 practices who participated repeatedly achieved a better score in their last round compared to their first. Overall, scores of Spanish hospitals improved from 67.79% in Fall 2015 to 68.91% in Fall 2019. Conclusions: This is the first study to evaluate QOPI scores in Spain; it showed that repeated participation enhances quality of care, although there is room for improvement. The ECO Foundation will continue supporting and engaging with practices to increase their participation in order to improve oncology care and implement strategies that address the areas for improvement.

Implementation of the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative Program in Spain: First Results and Implications

2021 ◽  
pp. OP.20.00683
Author(s):  
Carlos Camps ◽  
Rafael López ◽  
Antonio Antón ◽  
Enrique Aranda ◽  
Alfredo Carrato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Pathology Report ◽  
Tobacco Use Cessation ◽  
Metastatic Solid Tumor ◽  
Counseling And Assessment ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Initiative Program

PURPOSE: Measuring and tracking quality of care is highly relevant in today's health care. The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) program is a referral for evaluating oncology practices worldwide. Excellence and Quality in Oncology Foundation, a collaboration of oncology experts from major Spanish hospitals involved in cancer treatment, reached an agreement with QOPI to include Spanish hospitals in this program. METHODS: We analyzed the results of the QOPI Core module measures from 19 Spanish hospitals over nine rounds (from fall 2015 to fall 2019). RESULTS: Of the 19 hospitals, 15 completed more than one round; none participated in all nine (two hospitals participated in eight rounds). The highest scores were for pathology report confirming malignancy, documenting a plan of care for moderate or severe pain and chemotherapy dose, and chemotherapy administered to patients with metastatic solid tumor with performance status undocumented. Measures regarding a summary of chemotherapy treatment, tobacco use cessation counseling, and assessment of patient emotional well-being were among the lowest scored measures. Six of the 15 practices that participated repeatedly achieved a better score in their last round compared with their first. Overall, scores of Spanish hospitals improved from 67.79% in fall 2015 to 68.91% in fall 2019. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate QOPI scores in Spain. There was high variability in scores, with quality of care improving with repeated participation in some hospitals, but worsening in others. Excellence and Quality in Oncology Foundation will support practices to increase their participation to improve oncology care and implement strategies that address the areas for improvement.

The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative program: Experience in Spain.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 214-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Camps ◽  
Eduardo Diaz Rubio ◽  
Rafael Lopez ◽  
Alfredo Carrato ◽  
Pedro Gascon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Pathology Report ◽  
Certification Programs ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Patient Consent ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Initiative Program

214 Background: Patient care quality is a discipline that is being considered highly important in today’s healthcare. Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) is a referral worldwide in terms of quality for oncology practices. The ECO Foundation is a platform of experts representing the major Spanish hospitals involved in the treatment of cancer patients. ECO reached an agreement with QOPI in order to involve Spanish hospitals in the participation of the QOPI program. Methods: Two rounds of data collection were carried out (Fall 2015 and Spring 2016). Practices had to registered on-line and submit data into the platform provided by QOPI. ECO Foundation offers all centres the support of a CRO. 11 Spanish hospitals have participated in the first round and 6 in the second. 4 of them have participated in both rounds. Core and Lung Cancer modules were completed. Results: For the Fall 2015 round, 686 charts were included. In Spring 2016 334 charts were collected. For the first round, highest scores were: Pathology report confirming malignancy, Plan of care for pain, Effectiveness of narcotic, Patient consent, Tobacco cessation counselling, Patient emotional well-being assessed and in the 9 items of the lung cancer module. Lowest scores were: Pain addressed, Smoking status use, Smoking use cessation counselling, Smoking use cessation administered and Height, Weight, and BSA documented. For the Spring 2016 round, the results were similar, but for the items with the highest scores were now included: Chemotherapy intent discussion, Patient consents for chemotherapy, Smoking status documented, Height, Weight, and BSA documented. In Fall 2015, 7 out of 11 practices obtained a global score of over 70%, and in 2016, 3 out of 6. Regarding the 4 hospitals that repeated in both stages,3 reported an improvement of the global scoring in 2016. Conclusions: These preliminary results are a good starting point for the continued implementation of the QOPI program in Spain. Thus providing a well-structured approach to analyse cancer care in Spain, offering training programs for quality improvement in oncology practices. ECO Foundation will continue pursuing excellence and quality in Spain with future activities like the certification programs and training seminars.

The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative program: Experience in Spain.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 310-310
Author(s):  
Rafael Lopez ◽  
Antonio Anton ◽  
Enrique Aranda ◽  
Alfredo Carrato ◽  
Manuel Constenla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Pathology Report ◽  
Chemotherapy Treatment ◽  
Tobacco Use Cessation ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Patient Consent ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Initiative Program ◽  
Treatment Summary

310 Background: Patient care quality is a discipline with enormous relevance in today’s healthcare. Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) is a referral worldwide in quality for oncology practices. ECO Foundation is a collaboration of experts representing the major Spanish hospitals involved in the treatment of cancer patients. ECO reached an agreement with QOPI to involve Spanish hospitals in the QOPI program. Methods: Six rounds of data collection have taken place (Fall 2015 to Round 1 2018). Practices had to register online and submit data into the QOPI platform, and ECO Foundation offered all centers the necessary support. 17 Spanish hospitals have participated in the six rounds, and 7 of them have repeated participation. Core and Lung Cancer modules were completed. Results: During the six rounds, 1877 charts were submitted by the Spanish practices. In most of the rounds, the highest scores were: Pathology report confirming malignancy, Number of chemotherapy cycles documented, Patient consent for chemotherapy and 5 measures of the Lung Cancer module. The lowest scores were: Chemotherapy treatment summary provided to patient within 3 months of chemotherapy end, Chemotherapy treatment summary provided or communicated to practitioner(s) within 3 months of chemotherapy end, Smoking/tobacco use cessation counselling recommended to smokers/tobacco users in past year and Tobacco cessation counselling administered or patient referred in past year. The percentage of participating practices that presented results higher than 70% was successively 64%, 50%, 75% and 100% in the last three rounds. For the 7 hospitals that repeated participation, 3 reported an improvement of their global scores. Regarding QOPI Certification, three Spanish hospitals received this accreditation in September 2017 and one in June 2018. Conclusions: These preliminary results are a good starting point for the continued implementation of the QOPI program in Spain, thus providing a well-structured approach to analyze cancer care. ECO Foundation will continue pursuing excellence and quality with further activities like the QOPI Certification program and Quality Training Program, these being performed for the first time in Spain in 2017 and 2018 respectively.

A Process for Measuring the Quality of Cancer Care: The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (25) ◽  
pp. 6233-6239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael N. Neuss ◽  
Christopher E. Desch ◽  
Kristen K. McNiff ◽  
Peter D. Eisenberg ◽  
Dean H. Gesme ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Care ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Pathology Report ◽  
Self Assessment ◽  
Colon And Rectal Cancer ◽  
High Concordance ◽  
American Society ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Self Examination

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.

QIM19-135: The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative Program: Experience in Spain

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3.5) ◽  
pp. QIM19-135
Author(s):  
Rafael López ◽  
Antonio Antón ◽  
Enrique Aranda ◽  
Alfredo Carrato ◽  
Manuel Constenla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Pathology Report ◽  
Chemotherapy Treatment ◽  
Tobacco Use Cessation ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Patient Consent ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Initiative Program ◽  
Treatment Summary

Background: Patient quality care is a discipline that has acquired enormous relevance in today’s healthcare. The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) is a referral worldwide in terms of quality for oncology practices. The ECO Foundation is a foundation of experts representing the major Spanish hospitals involved in the treatment of cancer patients. ECO reached an agreement with ASCO to involve Spanish hospitals in the QOPI program. Methods: 6 rounds of data collection have taken place (Fall 2015 to Round 1 2018). Practices had to register online and submit data into the QOPI platform, and the ECO Foundation offered all centers the necessary support. 17 Spanish hospitals have participated in the 6 rounds, and 7 of them have repeated participation. Core and lung cancer modules were completed. Results: During the 6 rounds, 1,877 charts were submitted by the Spanish practices. In most of the rounds, the highest scores were: pathology report confirming malignancy; number of chemotherapy cycles documented; patient consent for chemotherapy; and 5 measures of the lung cancer module. The lowest scores were: chemotherapy treatment summary provided to patient within 3 months of chemotherapy end; chemotherapy treatment summary provided or communicated to practitioner(s) within 3 months of chemotherapy end; smoking/tobacco use cessation counselling recommended to smokers/tobacco users in past year; and tobacco cessation counselling administered or patient referred in past year. The percentage of participating practices that presented results higher than 70% was successively 64%, 50%, 75%, and 100% in the last 3 rounds. For the 7 hospitals that repeated participation, 3 reported an improvement of their global scores. Regarding QOPI Certification, 3 Spanish hospitals received this accreditation in September 2017 and one in June 2018. Conclusions: These preliminary results are a good starting point for the continued implementation of the QOPI program in Spain, thus providing a well-structured approach to analyze cancer care. The ECO Foundation will continue pursuing excellence and quality with further activities like the QOPI Certification program and Quality Training Program, these being performed for the first time in Spain in 2017 and 2018, respectively.

scholarly journals The Value of New Fields in the Medical Record for Quality Improvement

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore Poufos ◽  
Georgios Rigakos ◽  
Stefanos Labropoulos ◽  
Kalliopi Stathaki ◽  
Ioanna Theodorakopoulou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Record ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Psychosocial Assessment ◽  
Paper Medical Record ◽  
American Society ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Quality In Healthcare

ABSTRACT Introduction Quality in healthcare delivery is important for the safety and experience of patients with cancer. Effective documentation is an integral component of quality improvment, and accurate documentation can be affected by prompts in the medical record, potentially improving quality of services. Methods The Contemporary Oncology Team (COT) is a Greek private oncology practice that participated in the American Society of Clinical Oncology's (ASCO's) Quality in Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI). Between 2014 and 2019, COT implemented changes in its paper patient medical record, in order to improve quality of care and documentation. Fields regarding pain, emotional well-being and psychosocial assessment, discussions with the patient and consent about treatment and disease, medication details and cumulative dose, treatment goals, side-effect grading, pregnancy screening, treatment adherence and anticipated duration were added. In this report, we present the association of these improvements with COT performance in QOPI. Results Pain and emotional well-being assessment and documentation were significantly improved by the development of a structured patient follow-up form. In contrast, the assessment of fertility issues, tobacco use, and the documentation of treatment plan and intent did not present a drastic change, because COT performance was already above QOPI average. Conclusion A thorough reform of COT paper medical record according to QOPI standards improved QOPI scores, but more importantly effected a shift in the team's culture to safer and more standardized quality based care.

scholarly journals Sterilization regret in India: Is quality of care a matter of concern?

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anjali Bansal ◽  
Laxmi Kant Dwivedi
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Family Planning ◽  
Health Facility ◽  
Fold Increase ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Public Health Facility ◽  
The Family ◽  
Planning Methods

Abstract Background According to United Nations, 19% of females in the world relied only on the permanent method of family planning, with 37% in India according to NFHS-4. Limited studies tried to measure the sterilization regret, and its correlated factors. The study tried to explore the trend of sterilization regret in India from 1992 to 2015 and to elicit the determining effects of various factors on sterilization regret, especially in context to perceived quality of care in the sterilization operations and type of providers. Data and methods The pooled data from NFHS-1, NFHS-3 and NFHS-4 was used to explore the regret by creating interaction between time and all the predictors. Predicted probabilities were calculated to show the trend of sterilization regret amounting to quality of care, type of health provider at the three time periods. Results The sterilization regret was increased from 5 % in NFHS-1 to 7 % in NFHS-4. According to NFHS-4, for those whose sterilization was performed in private health facility the regret was found to be less (OR-0.937; 95% CI- (0.882–0.996)) compared to public health facility. Also, the results show a two-fold increase in regret when women reported bad quality of care. The results from predicted probabilities provide enough evidence that the regret due to bad quality of care in sterilization operation had increased with each subsequent round of NFHS. Conclusion Many socio-economic and demographic factors have influenced the regret, but the poor quality of care contributed maximum to the regret from 1992 to 2015. The health facilities have seriously strayed from improving the health and well-being of women in providing the family planning methods. In addition, to public facilities, the regret amounting to private facilities have also increased from NFHS-1 to 4. The quality of care provided in the family planning operation should be standardized in every hospital to strengthen the health systems in the country. The couple should be motivated to adopt more of spacing methods.

scholarly journals Understanding the Link between Family Caregiver Quality of Life and the Care Provided to Older People With Dementia

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 153-154
Author(s):  
Afeez Hazzan
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Older People ◽  
Family Caregivers ◽  
Family Caregiver ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
People With Dementia ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Dementia is one of the most rapidly growing diseases in the United States. In 2018, the direct costs to American society of caring for older people with dementia was approximately $277 billion. Primary informal caregivers are mainly responsible for the care of older people with dementia including Alzheimer’s disease. Caregivers perform a myriad of duties ranging from shopping for their loved ones’ groceries, helping with medications, and managing finances. The caregiving role becomes more demanding as the disease progresses over time, and studies have shown that the quality-of-life (QoL) experienced by caregivers of older adults who have dementia is lower than the QoL of caregivers for older people who do not have dementia. To the best of our knowledge, there has been no research conducted to investigate whether lower caregiver QoL affects the level or quality of care that caregivers provide to persons with dementia. In the current study, we interviewed family caregivers living in Rochester, New York to inquire about their quality of life and the care provided to older people living with dementia. Further, caregivers completed the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) as well as a draft questionnaire for measuring the quality of care provided to older people living with dementia. Both quantitative and qualitative findings from this study reveals important relationships between family caregiver QoL and the care provided, including the impact of social support and financial well-being. The study findings could have significant impact, particularly for the provision of much needed support for family caregivers.

Assessment of Quality of Life in Outpatients With Advanced Cancer: The Accuracy of Clinician Estimations and the Relevance of Spiritual Well-Being—A Hoosier Oncology Group Study

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (14) ◽  
pp. 2754-2759 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Fisch ◽  
Michael L. Titzer ◽  
Jean L. Kristeller ◽  
Jianzhao Shen ◽  
Patrick J. Loehrer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Therapeutic Trial ◽  
Slight Variation ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Spiritual Well Being

Purpose: To evaluate the association between quality-of-life (QOL) impairment as reported by patients and QOL impairment as judged by nurses or physicians, with and without consideration of spiritual well-being (SWB). Patients and Methods: A total of 163 patients with advanced cancer were enrolled onto a therapeutic trial, and cross-sectional data were derived from clinical and demographic questionnaires obtained at baseline, including assessment of patient QOL and SWB. Clinicians rated the QOL impairment of their patients as mild, moderate, or severe. Clinician-estimated QOL impairment and patient-derived QOL categories were compared. Correlation coefficients were estimated to associate QOL scores using different instruments. The analysis of variance method was used to compare Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–General scores on categorical variables. Results: There was no significant association between self-assessment scores and marital status, education level, performance status, or predicted life expectancy. However, a strong relationship between SWB and QOL was noted (P < .0001). Clinician-estimated QOL impairment matched the level of patient-derived QOL correctly in approximately 60% of cases, with only slight variation depending on the method of categorizing patient-derived QOL scores. The accuracy of clinician estimates was not associated with the level of SWB. Interestingly, a subset analysis of the inaccurate estimates revealed an association between lower SWB and clinician underestimation of QOL impairment (P = .0025). Conclusion: Clinician estimates of QOL impairment were accurate in more than 60% of patients. SWB is strongly associated with QOL, but it is not associated with the overall accuracy of clinicians’ judgments about QOL impairment.

National benchmarks and practice level variation on eight cross cutting quality measures.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 255-255
Author(s):  
Tracy E. Spinks ◽  
Lindsey Bandini ◽  
Amie Cook ◽  
Hong Gao ◽  
Nicholas Jennings ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Quality Measures ◽  
Surgical Oncology ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Prior Authorization ◽  
Level Variation ◽  
Practice Level

255 Background: While there is increased attention on the importance of quality measurement in oncology, especially with the rise of value-based payment, limited data exist on national averages and practice level variation for proposed quality measures to establish benchmarks and targets for quality improvement initiatives or value-based contracts. Methods: UnitedHealthcare (UHC) developed peer comparison reports for eight cross cutting quality measures for practices with an active contract for at least one of its commercial, Medicare or Medicaid health plans and ≥1 provider from the following specialties: gynecologic oncology, hematology/oncology, pediatric hematology/oncology, radiation oncology, or surgical oncology. Adherence to the quality measures below was calculated using a mix of claims data, clinical data from a prior authorization for cancer therapy, and CMS MIPS data. Patients were attributed through an algorithm that selected the most probable physician responsible for the patient’s care - responsible prior authorization provider, servicing provider or most recent visited provider prior to the treatment, varying by each measure. Dates of service differ by measure, ranging from 1/1/2019 through 12/31/2020. Results: We identified 5,828 unique tax identification numbers (TINs) with UHC members with cancer attributed to them during 2019-20. The number of practices included in the measurement cohort per measure varied significantly from 301 to 4,120 (tobacco screening and performance status, respectively). 2,422 TINs met the minimum patient count for at least one measure (≥10 patients or events). Overall performance ranged from 13.5% to 77.3% (hospice admission and PS documented) for measures where higher adherence reflects better quality of care. For measures where lower scores represent higher quality of care the range was 11.4% to 22.6% (hospice < 3 days and ED admission, respectively). Observed adherence was statistically better than expected for 0.5%-5.8% and statistically less than expected for 0.9%-5.6% of TINs in UHC’s network; however, more than half of the practices had insufficient sample size to make a determination. Conclusions: We observed substantial variation in quality across a national cohort of oncology practices. However, even for a large national payer, small sample sizes limited the assessment of a substantial number of practices.[Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document