Compliance with the commission on cancer quality of breast cancer care measures: Self-evaluation advised

William Lodrigues, Judy Dumas, Madhu Rao, Lisa Lilley, Roshni Rao

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To provide evaluations of cancer care quality, the Commission on Cancer and the National Quality Forum (NQF) established three breast cancer treatment quality measures. Programs that submit data to the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) can receive feedback on their compliance with these quality measures, and perform comparisons with other member institutions. Data received by a county hospital from the NCDB revealed poor compliance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of submitted data, identify contributing factors and initiate processes to improve. Reported 2004 NCDB quality measure compliance was 26% for radiation, 61.4% for chemotherapy, and 21.3% for hormonal therapy. Retrospective treatment review was performed. Data collected included: patient demographics, pathology, final surgical intervention, adjuvant treatment, and quality measure compliance. Sources included two electronic records, an electronic results depository, two paper charts, a pharmacy data base, and a "shadow chart." Applicability of and compliance with these quality measures was noted. Of 540 records reviewed, 132 met final study criteria. Actual compliance differed significantly from NCDB rates and were found to be 97% for radiation, 98% for chemotherapy, and 88% for hormonal therapy. Process analysis revealed the need for tumor registry staff to evaluate all sources of data. A significant problem was neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and the requirement to submit NCDB data within 6 months of initial diagnosis. Processes and education initiated for tumor registry staff, medical records personnel, physicians, and other care providers resulted in significantly improved 2007 compliance of data submitted to the NCDB. Prior to public reporting, institutions should perform NQF quality measure compliance assessments, confirm accuracy, and initiate educational processes/imperatives.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)167-171
Number of pages5
JournalBreast Journal
Volume17
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2011

Fingerprint

Diagnostic Self Evaluation
Breast Neoplasms
Databases
Compliance
Neoplasms
Registries
Radiation
Therapeutics
County Hospitals
Drug Therapy
Surgical Pathology
Quality of Health Care
Information Storage and Retrieval
Adjuvant Chemotherapy
Medical Records
Demography
Physicians
Education

Keywords

  • breast cancer
  • quality
  • treatment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine
  • Oncology
  • Surgery

Cite this

Compliance with the commission on cancer quality of breast cancer care measures : Self-evaluation advised. / Lodrigues, William; Dumas, Judy; Rao, Madhu; Lilley, Lisa; Rao, Roshni.

In: Breast Journal, Vol. 17, No. 2, 03.2011, p. 167-171.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lodrigues, William ; Dumas, Judy ; Rao, Madhu ; Lilley, Lisa ; Rao, Roshni. / Compliance with the commission on cancer quality of breast cancer care measures : Self-evaluation advised. In: Breast Journal. 2011 ; Vol. 17, No. 2. pp. 167-171.
@article{80735220350349cbba53e50b48f1a389,
title = "Compliance with the commission on cancer quality of breast cancer care measures: Self-evaluation advised",
abstract = "To provide evaluations of cancer care quality, the Commission on Cancer and the National Quality Forum (NQF) established three breast cancer treatment quality measures. Programs that submit data to the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) can receive feedback on their compliance with these quality measures, and perform comparisons with other member institutions. Data received by a county hospital from the NCDB revealed poor compliance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of submitted data, identify contributing factors and initiate processes to improve. Reported 2004 NCDB quality measure compliance was 26{\%} for radiation, 61.4{\%} for chemotherapy, and 21.3{\%} for hormonal therapy. Retrospective treatment review was performed. Data collected included: patient demographics, pathology, final surgical intervention, adjuvant treatment, and quality measure compliance. Sources included two electronic records, an electronic results depository, two paper charts, a pharmacy data base, and a {"}shadow chart.{"} Applicability of and compliance with these quality measures was noted. Of 540 records reviewed, 132 met final study criteria. Actual compliance differed significantly from NCDB rates and were found to be 97{\%} for radiation, 98{\%} for chemotherapy, and 88{\%} for hormonal therapy. Process analysis revealed the need for tumor registry staff to evaluate all sources of data. A significant problem was neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and the requirement to submit NCDB data within 6 months of initial diagnosis. Processes and education initiated for tumor registry staff, medical records personnel, physicians, and other care providers resulted in significantly improved 2007 compliance of data submitted to the NCDB. Prior to public reporting, institutions should perform NQF quality measure compliance assessments, confirm accuracy, and initiate educational processes/imperatives.",
keywords = "breast cancer, quality, treatment",
author = "William Lodrigues and Judy Dumas and Madhu Rao and Lisa Lilley and Roshni Rao",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.01047.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "167--171",
journal = "Breast Journal",
issn = "1075-122X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Compliance with the commission on cancer quality of breast cancer care measures

T2 - Self-evaluation advised

AU - Lodrigues, William

AU - Dumas, Judy

AU - Rao, Madhu

AU - Lilley, Lisa

AU - Rao, Roshni

PY - 2011/3

Y1 - 2011/3

N2 - To provide evaluations of cancer care quality, the Commission on Cancer and the National Quality Forum (NQF) established three breast cancer treatment quality measures. Programs that submit data to the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) can receive feedback on their compliance with these quality measures, and perform comparisons with other member institutions. Data received by a county hospital from the NCDB revealed poor compliance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of submitted data, identify contributing factors and initiate processes to improve. Reported 2004 NCDB quality measure compliance was 26% for radiation, 61.4% for chemotherapy, and 21.3% for hormonal therapy. Retrospective treatment review was performed. Data collected included: patient demographics, pathology, final surgical intervention, adjuvant treatment, and quality measure compliance. Sources included two electronic records, an electronic results depository, two paper charts, a pharmacy data base, and a "shadow chart." Applicability of and compliance with these quality measures was noted. Of 540 records reviewed, 132 met final study criteria. Actual compliance differed significantly from NCDB rates and were found to be 97% for radiation, 98% for chemotherapy, and 88% for hormonal therapy. Process analysis revealed the need for tumor registry staff to evaluate all sources of data. A significant problem was neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and the requirement to submit NCDB data within 6 months of initial diagnosis. Processes and education initiated for tumor registry staff, medical records personnel, physicians, and other care providers resulted in significantly improved 2007 compliance of data submitted to the NCDB. Prior to public reporting, institutions should perform NQF quality measure compliance assessments, confirm accuracy, and initiate educational processes/imperatives.

AB - To provide evaluations of cancer care quality, the Commission on Cancer and the National Quality Forum (NQF) established three breast cancer treatment quality measures. Programs that submit data to the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) can receive feedback on their compliance with these quality measures, and perform comparisons with other member institutions. Data received by a county hospital from the NCDB revealed poor compliance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of submitted data, identify contributing factors and initiate processes to improve. Reported 2004 NCDB quality measure compliance was 26% for radiation, 61.4% for chemotherapy, and 21.3% for hormonal therapy. Retrospective treatment review was performed. Data collected included: patient demographics, pathology, final surgical intervention, adjuvant treatment, and quality measure compliance. Sources included two electronic records, an electronic results depository, two paper charts, a pharmacy data base, and a "shadow chart." Applicability of and compliance with these quality measures was noted. Of 540 records reviewed, 132 met final study criteria. Actual compliance differed significantly from NCDB rates and were found to be 97% for radiation, 98% for chemotherapy, and 88% for hormonal therapy. Process analysis revealed the need for tumor registry staff to evaluate all sources of data. A significant problem was neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and the requirement to submit NCDB data within 6 months of initial diagnosis. Processes and education initiated for tumor registry staff, medical records personnel, physicians, and other care providers resulted in significantly improved 2007 compliance of data submitted to the NCDB. Prior to public reporting, institutions should perform NQF quality measure compliance assessments, confirm accuracy, and initiate educational processes/imperatives.

KW - breast cancer

KW - quality

KW - treatment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952741361&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952741361&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.01047.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.01047.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 21294806

AN - SCOPUS:79952741361

VL - 17

SP - 167

EP - 171

JO - Breast Journal

JF - Breast Journal

SN - 1075-122X

IS - 2

ER -