Cargando…
Evaluation of Quality Indicators of Breast Cancer Management at a Tertiary Cancer Center in Nepal
Breast cancer is the second commonest cancer among female in Nepal. This is our first attempt to audit breast cancer management in our institute and compare with standard quality indicators (QIs) available. METHODS: The retrospective study included 104 female patients with breast cancer who had take...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8955076/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35298295 http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/GO.21.00303 |
Sumario: | Breast cancer is the second commonest cancer among female in Nepal. This is our first attempt to audit breast cancer management in our institute and compare with standard quality indicators (QIs) available. METHODS: The retrospective study included 104 female patients with breast cancer who had taken treatment at Bhaktapur Cancer Hospital in 1 year. Participants were selected on the basis of convenience sampling. Of 33 QIs in breast cancer management according to European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists guidelines, 19 QIs were chosen relevant to our setup. These QIs were calculated for all patients and compared with the European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists standard target. Frequencies and percentages were calculated and presented in tables. Binomial 95% of the rates for QI adherence were also calculated for each QI. RESULTS: One hundred four patients had a median age of 47.5 years (range 24-70 years). Applicable QIs were in the range of 5-15 with a mean of 9.66 per patient. Of 19 evaluable QIs, very high adherence rates were observed in six QIs, high adherence in three Qis, and low adherences in 10 QIs. High adherence rates were for QI 5 and QI 10a, which were 88.46% and 94.73%, respectively. The low compliance was for QI 1, QI 4a, QI 8, QI 9d, QI 10b, QI 11a, QI 11b, QI 13b, QI 13e, and 14b, which were 53.84%, 78.21%, 0%, 83.16%, 76.92%, 36.0%, 33.33%, 4.76%, 30.55%, and 10.81%, respectively. CONCLUSION: There are several QIs that have low levels of adherence in our setting and suggest that there is significant room for improvement. We will be continuing auditing these QIs regularly to improve our quality of care. |
---|