Cargando…

The Timeliness Initiative: Continuous Process Improvement for Prompt Initiation of Radiation Therapy Treatment

PURPOSE: The ambulatory patient experience is heavily influenced by wait times for provider care. Delayed patient visit start times may negatively affect overall satisfaction, and increased wait times affect the perception of the information, instructions, and treatment given by health care provider...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Agazaryan, Nzhde, Chow, Phillip, Lamb, James, Cao, Minsong, Raldow, Ann, Beron, Phillip, Hegde, John, Steinberg, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7557132/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33083664
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2020.01.007
_version_ 1783594353487249408
author Agazaryan, Nzhde
Chow, Phillip
Lamb, James
Cao, Minsong
Raldow, Ann
Beron, Phillip
Hegde, John
Steinberg, Michael
author_facet Agazaryan, Nzhde
Chow, Phillip
Lamb, James
Cao, Minsong
Raldow, Ann
Beron, Phillip
Hegde, John
Steinberg, Michael
author_sort Agazaryan, Nzhde
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The ambulatory patient experience is heavily influenced by wait times for provider care. Delayed patient visit start times may negatively affect overall satisfaction, and increased wait times affect the perception of the information, instructions, and treatment given by health care providers. Improving institutional practices overall requires the determination of the essential quality metrics that will make such an achievement possible. A protracted time leading up to the initiation of radiation therapy may promote poor satisfaction and perceived quality of care for both patients and referring providers alike, which may then create a barrier to patients being treated with radiation therapy. This institution piloted and sucessfully completed a study into improving the timeliness of initiation of patient radiation therapy for our patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This work sought to identify inefficiencies in radiation therapy treatment planning to shorten the time each patient waited for treatment. We examined the time between simulation to the start of the first fraction of treatment. This period includes simulation, contouring, treatment planning, and quality assurance of the plan. RESULTS: Before the study, the planning process would typically take 2 weeks. Target and organs-at-risk contouring were found to be the main inefficiency delaying treatment start dates. This delineating process includes drawing contours on radiologic images, typically computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. We focused on the time needed for the contouring process to be completed and took steps to increase efficiency. The length of time from simulation to contour approval was decreased by more than 60%, a reduction from an average of more than 4 days to less than 1.5 days. Overall planning time dropped from 2 weeks to less than 5 days. CONCLUSIONS: Process improvements and implementation of task-specific tools improved the timeliness of patient treatments, reducing the overall planning time from simulation to treatments to less than 5 days. Continuous monitoring and modification of these processes revealed that the successes achieved toward better quality of care have been sustained.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7557132
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75571322020-10-19 The Timeliness Initiative: Continuous Process Improvement for Prompt Initiation of Radiation Therapy Treatment Agazaryan, Nzhde Chow, Phillip Lamb, James Cao, Minsong Raldow, Ann Beron, Phillip Hegde, John Steinberg, Michael Adv Radiat Oncol Scientific Article PURPOSE: The ambulatory patient experience is heavily influenced by wait times for provider care. Delayed patient visit start times may negatively affect overall satisfaction, and increased wait times affect the perception of the information, instructions, and treatment given by health care providers. Improving institutional practices overall requires the determination of the essential quality metrics that will make such an achievement possible. A protracted time leading up to the initiation of radiation therapy may promote poor satisfaction and perceived quality of care for both patients and referring providers alike, which may then create a barrier to patients being treated with radiation therapy. This institution piloted and sucessfully completed a study into improving the timeliness of initiation of patient radiation therapy for our patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This work sought to identify inefficiencies in radiation therapy treatment planning to shorten the time each patient waited for treatment. We examined the time between simulation to the start of the first fraction of treatment. This period includes simulation, contouring, treatment planning, and quality assurance of the plan. RESULTS: Before the study, the planning process would typically take 2 weeks. Target and organs-at-risk contouring were found to be the main inefficiency delaying treatment start dates. This delineating process includes drawing contours on radiologic images, typically computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. We focused on the time needed for the contouring process to be completed and took steps to increase efficiency. The length of time from simulation to contour approval was decreased by more than 60%, a reduction from an average of more than 4 days to less than 1.5 days. Overall planning time dropped from 2 weeks to less than 5 days. CONCLUSIONS: Process improvements and implementation of task-specific tools improved the timeliness of patient treatments, reducing the overall planning time from simulation to treatments to less than 5 days. Continuous monitoring and modification of these processes revealed that the successes achieved toward better quality of care have been sustained. Elsevier 2020-03-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7557132/ /pubmed/33083664 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2020.01.007 Text en © 2020 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Scientific Article
Agazaryan, Nzhde
Chow, Phillip
Lamb, James
Cao, Minsong
Raldow, Ann
Beron, Phillip
Hegde, John
Steinberg, Michael
The Timeliness Initiative: Continuous Process Improvement for Prompt Initiation of Radiation Therapy Treatment
title The Timeliness Initiative: Continuous Process Improvement for Prompt Initiation of Radiation Therapy Treatment
title_full The Timeliness Initiative: Continuous Process Improvement for Prompt Initiation of Radiation Therapy Treatment
title_fullStr The Timeliness Initiative: Continuous Process Improvement for Prompt Initiation of Radiation Therapy Treatment
title_full_unstemmed The Timeliness Initiative: Continuous Process Improvement for Prompt Initiation of Radiation Therapy Treatment
title_short The Timeliness Initiative: Continuous Process Improvement for Prompt Initiation of Radiation Therapy Treatment
title_sort timeliness initiative: continuous process improvement for prompt initiation of radiation therapy treatment
topic Scientific Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7557132/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33083664
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2020.01.007
work_keys_str_mv AT agazaryannzhde thetimelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT chowphillip thetimelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT lambjames thetimelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT caominsong thetimelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT raldowann thetimelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT beronphillip thetimelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT hegdejohn thetimelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT steinbergmichael thetimelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT agazaryannzhde timelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT chowphillip timelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT lambjames timelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT caominsong timelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT raldowann timelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT beronphillip timelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT hegdejohn timelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment
AT steinbergmichael timelinessinitiativecontinuousprocessimprovementforpromptinitiationofradiationtherapytreatment