scholarly journals Improving Quality of Cancer Care at Community Hospitals: Impact of the National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program Pilot

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e298-e304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael T. Halpern ◽  
Pamela Spain ◽  
Debra J. Holden ◽  
Andrew Stewart ◽  
Erica J. McNamara ◽  
...  

Both NCCCP and comparison-group hospitals showed improved quality of care; however, NCCCP sites had significantly greater improvements in a subset of measures, which may reflect the multidisciplinary focus of the NCCCP.

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Kowalski ◽  
Hilde Schulte ◽  
Simone Wesselmann

The authors outline a reporting program in use by an increasing number of certified cancer centers in Germany to report quality-of-care indicators.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vida Henderson ◽  
Jessica Madrigal ◽  
Jeanette Gonzalez ◽  
Erica Martinez ◽  
Katherine Tossas-Milligan ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (22) ◽  
pp. 3735-3742 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin A. Spencer ◽  
David C. Miller ◽  
Mark S. Litwin ◽  
Jamie D. Ritchey ◽  
Andrew K. Stewart ◽  
...  

Purpose The commencement of quality-improvement initiatives such as Pay for Performance and the Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement has underscored calls to evaluate the quality of cancer care on a patient level for nationally representative samples. Methods We sampled early-stage prostate cancer cases diagnosed in 2000 through 2001 from the American College of Surgeons National Cancer Data Base and explicitly reviewed medical records from 2,775 men (weighted total = 55,160 cases) treated with radical prostatectomy or external-beam radiation therapy. We determined compliance with 29 quality-of-care disease-specific structure and process indicators developed by RAND, stratified by race, geographic region, and hospital type. Results Overall compliance exceeded 70% for structural and pretherapy disease assessment indicators but was lower for documentation of pretreatment functioning (46.4% to 78.4%), surgical pathology (37.1% to 86.3%), radiation technique (62.6% to 88.3%), and follow-up (55%). Geographic variations were observed as higher compliance in the South Atlantic division than the New England division for having at least one board-certified urologist (odds ratio [OR], 9.2; 95% CI, 1.9 to 45.0), at least one board-certified radiation oncologist (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.2 to 9.0), use of Gleason grading (OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.2 to 13.8), and administering total radiation dose ≥ 70 Gy (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.6 to 6.1). Teaching/research hospitals and Comprehensive Cancer Centers had higher compliance than Community Cancer Centers, whereas racial differences were not observed for any indicator. Conclusion The significant and unwarranted variations observed for these quality indicators by census division and hospital type illustrate the inconsistencies in prostate cancer care and represent potential targets for quality improvement. The lack of racial disparities suggests equity in care once a patient initiates treatment.


2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. e35-e37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Litton ◽  
Dianne Kane ◽  
Gina Clay ◽  
Patricia Kruger ◽  
Thomas Belnap ◽  
...  

If implemented appropriately, multidisciplinary clinics can enhance quality of care and increase downstream revenue. The multidisciplinary clinic at Intermountain Healthcare has greatly improved the cancer care process for patients, physicians, and the community.


The Breast ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Kowalski ◽  
Julia Ferencz ◽  
Sara Y. Brucker ◽  
Rolf Kreienberg ◽  
Simone Wesselmann

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (23) ◽  
pp. 3860-3866 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig C. Earle ◽  
Mary Beth Landrum ◽  
Jeffrey M. Souza ◽  
Bridget A. Neville ◽  
Jane C. Weeks ◽  
...  

The purpose of this article is to review the literature and update analyses pertaining to the aggressiveness of cancer care near the end of life. Specifically, we will discuss trends and factors responsible for chemotherapy overuse very near death and underutilization of hospice services. Whether the concept of overly aggressive treatment represents a quality-of-care issue that is acceptable to all involved stakeholders is an open question.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e048863
Author(s):  
Lisa Puglisi ◽  
Alexandra A Halberstam ◽  
Jenerius Aminawung ◽  
Colleen Gallagher ◽  
Lou Gonsalves ◽  
...  

IntroductionIncarceration is associated with decreased cancer screening rates and a higher risk for hospitalisation and death from cancer after release from prison. However, there is a paucity of data on the relationship between incarceration and cancer outcomes and quality of care. In the Incarceration and Cancer-Related Outcomes Study, we aim to develop a nuanced understanding of how incarceration affects cancer incidence, mortality and treatment, and moderates the relationship between socioeconomic status, structural racism and cancer disparities.Methods and analysisWe will use a sequential explanatory mixed-methods study design. We will create the first comprehensive linkage of data from the Connecticut Department of Correction and the statewide Connecticut Tumour Registry. Using the linked dataset, we will examine differences in cancer incidence and stage at diagnosis between individuals currently incarcerated, formerly incarcerated and never incarcerated in Connecticut from 2005 to 2016. Among individuals with invasive cancer, we will assess relationships among incarceration, quality of cancer care and mortality, and will assess the degree to which incarceration status moderates relationships among race, socioeconomic status, quality of cancer care and cancer mortality. We will use multivariable logistic regression and Cox survival models with interaction terms as appropriate. These results will inform our conduct of in-depth interviews with individuals diagnosed with cancer during or shortly after incarceration regarding their experiences with cancer care in the correctional system and the immediate postrelease period. The results of this qualitative work will help contextualise the results of the data linkage.Ethics and disseminationThe Yale University Institutional Review Board (#2000022899) and the Connecticut Department of Public Health Human Investigations Committee approved this study. We will disseminate study findings through peer-reviewed publications and academic and community presentations. Access to the deidentified quantitative and qualitative datasets will be made available on review of the request.


2010 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petros Giovanis ◽  
Giovanni De Leonardis ◽  
Antonella Garna ◽  
Viviana Lovat ◽  
Francesca Caldart ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document