Cancer care quality measures: diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer
Patwardhan MB, Samsa GP, McCrory DC, Fisher DA, Mantyh CR, Morse MA, Prosnitz RG, Cline KE, Gray RN
Record ID 32006000733
English
Authors' objectives:
The aim of this report was to identify measures that are currently available to assess the quality of care provided to patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), and to assess the extent to which these measures have been developed and tested.
Authors' results and conclusions:
We identified a number of well-developed and well-tested CRC-related quality-of care measures, both general process-of-care measures (on a broader scale) and technical measures (pertaining to specific details of a procedure). At least some process measures are available for diagnostic imaging, staging, surgical therapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant radiation therapy, and colonoscopic surveillance. Various technical measures were identified for quality of colonoscopy (e.g., cecal intubation rate, complications) and staging (adequate lymph node retrieval and evaluation). These technical measures were guideline-based and well developed, but less well tested, and the linkage between them and patient outcomes, although intuitive, was not always explicitly provided. For some elements of the care pathway, such as operative reports and chemotherapy reports, no technical measures were found.
Authors' recommendations:
Some general process measures have a stronger evidence base than others. Those based on guidelines have the strongest evidence base; those derived from basic first principles supported by some research findings are relatively weaker, but are often sufficient for the task at hand. A consistent source of tension is the distinction between the clinically derived fine-tuning of the definition of a quality measure and the limitations of available data sources (which often do not contain sufficient information to act on such distinctions). Although some excellent technical measures were found, the overall development of technical measures seems less advanced than that of the general process measures.
Authors' methods:
Systematic review
Details
Project Status:
Completed
Year Published:
2006
English language abstract:
An English language summary is available
Publication Type:
Not Assigned
Country:
United States
MeSH Terms
- Quality of Health Care
- Colorectal Neoplasms
Contact
Organisation Name:
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Contact Address:
Center for Outcomes and Evidence Technology Assessment Program, 540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850, USA. Tel: +1 301 427 1610; Fax: +1 301 427 1639;
Contact Name:
martin.erlichman@ahrq.hhs.gov
Contact Email:
martin.erlichman@ahrq.hhs.gov
Copyright:
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA or other HTA producer. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database.