Cargando…

Head and neck cancers: Monitoring quality and reporting outcomes

INTRODUCTION: Head and neck cancers (HNC) require high level multidisciplinary care to achieve optimal outcomes. Reporting of quality indicators (QIs) has been instigated by some health services in an effort to improve quality of care. The aim of this study was to determine the quality of care provi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chilkuri, Madhavi, Vangaveti, Venkat, Smith, Justin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9299932/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34851013
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13359
_version_ 1784751092651786240
author Chilkuri, Madhavi
Vangaveti, Venkat
Smith, Justin
author_facet Chilkuri, Madhavi
Vangaveti, Venkat
Smith, Justin
author_sort Chilkuri, Madhavi
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Head and neck cancers (HNC) require high level multidisciplinary care to achieve optimal outcomes. Reporting of quality indicators (QIs) has been instigated by some health services in an effort to improve quality of care. The aim of this study was to determine the quality of care provided to patients with HNC at a single institution by analysing compliance with QIs and to explore the feasibility and utility of collecting this data. METHODS: This was a single institution retrospective chart review of all patients with squamous cell HNC at Townsville Hospital who were treated with curative intent between June 2011 and June 2019. Data was entered into a RedCap database and then exported to Stata V16 for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 537 patients were included in the overall study, with six patients who had a synchronous non‐HNC and two patients who received previous radiotherapy (RT) to the head and neck region excluded from the outcome analysis. Overall, compliance with pre‐treatment, treatment and post‐treatment QIs was high, with the exception of smoking cessation support (66%), post‐treatment dental review and time to post‐operative RT (33% of patients within 6 weeks). The 5‐year overall survival was 69.4% (CI; 64–73.2%). The cumulative incidence of locoregional relapse for the overall study cohort was 18% (CI; 14.8–21.4%). CONCLUSION: Collecting and evaluating quality metrics is feasible and helps identify areas for improvement. Centres treating HNC patients should strive towards monitoring quality against benchmarks and demonstrate transparency in outcome data.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9299932
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92999322022-07-21 Head and neck cancers: Monitoring quality and reporting outcomes Chilkuri, Madhavi Vangaveti, Venkat Smith, Justin J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol RADIATION ONCOLOGY INTRODUCTION: Head and neck cancers (HNC) require high level multidisciplinary care to achieve optimal outcomes. Reporting of quality indicators (QIs) has been instigated by some health services in an effort to improve quality of care. The aim of this study was to determine the quality of care provided to patients with HNC at a single institution by analysing compliance with QIs and to explore the feasibility and utility of collecting this data. METHODS: This was a single institution retrospective chart review of all patients with squamous cell HNC at Townsville Hospital who were treated with curative intent between June 2011 and June 2019. Data was entered into a RedCap database and then exported to Stata V16 for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 537 patients were included in the overall study, with six patients who had a synchronous non‐HNC and two patients who received previous radiotherapy (RT) to the head and neck region excluded from the outcome analysis. Overall, compliance with pre‐treatment, treatment and post‐treatment QIs was high, with the exception of smoking cessation support (66%), post‐treatment dental review and time to post‐operative RT (33% of patients within 6 weeks). The 5‐year overall survival was 69.4% (CI; 64–73.2%). The cumulative incidence of locoregional relapse for the overall study cohort was 18% (CI; 14.8–21.4%). CONCLUSION: Collecting and evaluating quality metrics is feasible and helps identify areas for improvement. Centres treating HNC patients should strive towards monitoring quality against benchmarks and demonstrate transparency in outcome data. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-12-01 2022-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9299932/ /pubmed/34851013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13359 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle RADIATION ONCOLOGY
Chilkuri, Madhavi
Vangaveti, Venkat
Smith, Justin
Head and neck cancers: Monitoring quality and reporting outcomes
title Head and neck cancers: Monitoring quality and reporting outcomes
title_full Head and neck cancers: Monitoring quality and reporting outcomes
title_fullStr Head and neck cancers: Monitoring quality and reporting outcomes
title_full_unstemmed Head and neck cancers: Monitoring quality and reporting outcomes
title_short Head and neck cancers: Monitoring quality and reporting outcomes
title_sort head and neck cancers: monitoring quality and reporting outcomes
topic RADIATION ONCOLOGY
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9299932/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34851013
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13359
work_keys_str_mv AT chilkurimadhavi headandneckcancersmonitoringqualityandreportingoutcomes
AT vangavetivenkat headandneckcancersmonitoringqualityandreportingoutcomes
AT smithjustin headandneckcancersmonitoringqualityandreportingoutcomes