Cargando…

Comparative indicators for cancer network management in England: Availability, characteristics and presentation

BACKGROUND: In 2000, the national cancer plan for England created 34 cancer networks, new organisational structures to coordinate services across populations varying between a half and three million people. We investigated the availability of data sets reflecting measures of structure, process and o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McCarthy, Mark, Gonzalez-Izquierdo, Arturo, Sherlaw-Johnson, Chris, Khachatryan, Artak, Coleman, Michel P, Rachet, Bernard
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2292168/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18304315
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-45
_version_ 1782152475075149824
author McCarthy, Mark
Gonzalez-Izquierdo, Arturo
Sherlaw-Johnson, Chris
Khachatryan, Artak
Coleman, Michel P
Rachet, Bernard
author_facet McCarthy, Mark
Gonzalez-Izquierdo, Arturo
Sherlaw-Johnson, Chris
Khachatryan, Artak
Coleman, Michel P
Rachet, Bernard
author_sort McCarthy, Mark
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In 2000, the national cancer plan for England created 34 cancer networks, new organisational structures to coordinate services across populations varying between a half and three million people. We investigated the availability of data sets reflecting measures of structure, process and outcome that could be used to support network management. METHODS: We investigated the properties of national data sets relating to four common cancers – breast, colorectal, lung and prostate. We reviewed the availability and completeness of these data sets, identified leading items within each set and put them into tables of the 34 cancer networks. We also investigated methods of presentation. RESULTS: The Acute Hospitals Portfolio and the Cancer Standards Peer Review recorded structural characteristics at hospital and cancer service level. Process measures included Hospital Episode Statistics, recording admissions, and Hospital Waiting-List data. Patient outcome measures included the National Survey of Patient Satisfaction for cancer, and cancer survival, drawn from cancer registration. Data were drawn together to provide an exemplar indicator set a single network, and methods of graphical presentation were considered. CONCLUSION: While not as yet used together in practice, comparative indicators are available within the National Health Service in England for use in performance assessment by cancer networks.
format Text
id pubmed-2292168
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-22921682008-04-11 Comparative indicators for cancer network management in England: Availability, characteristics and presentation McCarthy, Mark Gonzalez-Izquierdo, Arturo Sherlaw-Johnson, Chris Khachatryan, Artak Coleman, Michel P Rachet, Bernard BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: In 2000, the national cancer plan for England created 34 cancer networks, new organisational structures to coordinate services across populations varying between a half and three million people. We investigated the availability of data sets reflecting measures of structure, process and outcome that could be used to support network management. METHODS: We investigated the properties of national data sets relating to four common cancers – breast, colorectal, lung and prostate. We reviewed the availability and completeness of these data sets, identified leading items within each set and put them into tables of the 34 cancer networks. We also investigated methods of presentation. RESULTS: The Acute Hospitals Portfolio and the Cancer Standards Peer Review recorded structural characteristics at hospital and cancer service level. Process measures included Hospital Episode Statistics, recording admissions, and Hospital Waiting-List data. Patient outcome measures included the National Survey of Patient Satisfaction for cancer, and cancer survival, drawn from cancer registration. Data were drawn together to provide an exemplar indicator set a single network, and methods of graphical presentation were considered. CONCLUSION: While not as yet used together in practice, comparative indicators are available within the National Health Service in England for use in performance assessment by cancer networks. BioMed Central 2008-02-27 /pmc/articles/PMC2292168/ /pubmed/18304315 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-45 Text en Copyright © 2008 McCarthy et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
McCarthy, Mark
Gonzalez-Izquierdo, Arturo
Sherlaw-Johnson, Chris
Khachatryan, Artak
Coleman, Michel P
Rachet, Bernard
Comparative indicators for cancer network management in England: Availability, characteristics and presentation
title Comparative indicators for cancer network management in England: Availability, characteristics and presentation
title_full Comparative indicators for cancer network management in England: Availability, characteristics and presentation
title_fullStr Comparative indicators for cancer network management in England: Availability, characteristics and presentation
title_full_unstemmed Comparative indicators for cancer network management in England: Availability, characteristics and presentation
title_short Comparative indicators for cancer network management in England: Availability, characteristics and presentation
title_sort comparative indicators for cancer network management in england: availability, characteristics and presentation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2292168/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18304315
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-45
work_keys_str_mv AT mccarthymark comparativeindicatorsforcancernetworkmanagementinenglandavailabilitycharacteristicsandpresentation
AT gonzalezizquierdoarturo comparativeindicatorsforcancernetworkmanagementinenglandavailabilitycharacteristicsandpresentation
AT sherlawjohnsonchris comparativeindicatorsforcancernetworkmanagementinenglandavailabilitycharacteristicsandpresentation
AT khachatryanartak comparativeindicatorsforcancernetworkmanagementinenglandavailabilitycharacteristicsandpresentation
AT colemanmichelp comparativeindicatorsforcancernetworkmanagementinenglandavailabilitycharacteristicsandpresentation
AT rachetbernard comparativeindicatorsforcancernetworkmanagementinenglandavailabilitycharacteristicsandpresentation