TY - JOUR
T1 - Indicators based on registers and administrative data for breast cancer
T2 - Routine evaluation of oncologic care pathway can be implemented
AU - Andreano, Anita
AU - Anghinoni, Emanuela
AU - Autelitano, Mariangela
AU - Bellini, Aldo
AU - Bersani, Maurizio
AU - Bizzoco, Sabrina
AU - Cavalieri d'Oro, Luca
AU - Decarli, Adriano
AU - Lucchi, Silvia
AU - Mannino, Salvatore
AU - Panciroli, Emerico
AU - Rebora, Paola
AU - Rognoni, Magda
AU - Sampietro, Giuseppe
AU - Villa, Marco
AU - Zocchetti, Carlo
AU - Zucchi, Alberto
AU - Valsecchi, Maria Grazia
AU - Russo, Antonio Giampiero
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - Rationale, aims and objectives: Assuring the best standards of care - in a sustainable way - in chronic diseases as breast cancer is nowadays an important challenge for any health system. The aim of this study was to present the methodology used to define a set of quality indicators, computable from administrative data for the pathway of care of breast cancer, and its application at a population level. Method: The cohort of 2007-2009 incident cases of breast cancer was identified through a network of six cancer registers in Northern Italy. Cases of sarcoma and lymphoma, patients with multiple primary cancers and those metastatic at diagnosis were excluded; 9614 women were retained for the analysis. For each indicator, the sub-cohort of women eligible for the diagnostic/therapeutic procedures was identified and calculations were performed through record linkage between the cohort and sources of health information. Data on potential available confounders or prognostic factors were also collected. Results: For a few indicators, such as cyto-histological assessment before surgery (62%) and intensive follow-up (79%), deviation from recommendations was evident. Younger patients (≤50 years) more frequently needed a short term re-intervention, while older patients less frequently underwent reconstructive surgery and received palliative care. Several indicators had a great variability across hospitals. In some cases, this heterogeneity appeared to be related to the hospital size, with high-volume hospitals being more compliant to guidelines. Conclusion: It is possible to evaluate the quality of cancer care delivered in clinical practice in recent years, in order to implement interventions aimed to improve adherence to international standards of care.
AB - Rationale, aims and objectives: Assuring the best standards of care - in a sustainable way - in chronic diseases as breast cancer is nowadays an important challenge for any health system. The aim of this study was to present the methodology used to define a set of quality indicators, computable from administrative data for the pathway of care of breast cancer, and its application at a population level. Method: The cohort of 2007-2009 incident cases of breast cancer was identified through a network of six cancer registers in Northern Italy. Cases of sarcoma and lymphoma, patients with multiple primary cancers and those metastatic at diagnosis were excluded; 9614 women were retained for the analysis. For each indicator, the sub-cohort of women eligible for the diagnostic/therapeutic procedures was identified and calculations were performed through record linkage between the cohort and sources of health information. Data on potential available confounders or prognostic factors were also collected. Results: For a few indicators, such as cyto-histological assessment before surgery (62%) and intensive follow-up (79%), deviation from recommendations was evident. Younger patients (≤50 years) more frequently needed a short term re-intervention, while older patients less frequently underwent reconstructive surgery and received palliative care. Several indicators had a great variability across hospitals. In some cases, this heterogeneity appeared to be related to the hospital size, with high-volume hospitals being more compliant to guidelines. Conclusion: It is possible to evaluate the quality of cancer care delivered in clinical practice in recent years, in order to implement interventions aimed to improve adherence to international standards of care.
KW - Access
KW - And evaluation
KW - Breast neoplasms
KW - Clinical pathways
KW - Guideline adherence
KW - Health care
KW - Health care evaluation mechanisms
KW - Health care quality
KW - Quality indicators
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84939640347&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84939640347&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/jep.12436
DO - 10.1111/jep.12436
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84939640347
SN - 1356-1294
JO - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
JF - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
ER -