Quality Measures for Supportive Cancer Care: The Cancer Quality-ASSIST Project |
| |
| Authors: | Karl A Lorenz MD MSHS Sydney M Dy MD MPH Arash Naeim MD PhD Anne M Walling MD Homayoon Sanati MD Patricia Smith MS Roberta Shanman MS Carol P Roth RN MPH Steven M Asch MD MPH |
| |
| Affiliation: | aVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California, USA;bRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, USA;cDavid Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA;dSydney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA;eDepartment of Oncology, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, California, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Patients and physicians often cite symptom control as one of their most important goals in cancer care. Despite this, a previous systematic review found few tools for evaluating the quality of supportive cancer management. We developed a comprehensive set of quality indicators for evaluating pain and nonpain symptom management as well as care planning needs in cancer patients. Based on the prevalence and quality-of-life data, clinician-researchers prioritized pain, psychosocial distress, dyspnea, nausea and vomiting, fatigue and anorexia, treatment-associated toxicities, and information and care planning for quality-indicator development. Using search terms and selection criteria, we identified English-language documents from Medline (1997–2007) and Internet-based searches. Based on this evidence, clinician-reviewers proposed process quality indicators. We then used the VA Health Services Research and Development (VA HSR & D) appropriateness methods to compile the ratings of a multidisciplinary, international expert panel of the validity and feasibility of each indicator. The panel judged 92 out of 133 (69%) proposed quality indicators valid and feasible (15 out of 23 pain, 5 out of 6 depression, 8 out of 11 dyspnea, 15 out of 19 nausea and vomiting, 13 out of 26 fatigue and anorexia, 23 out of 32 other treatment-associated toxicities, and 13 out of 16 information and care planning). Of the final indicators, 67 are potentially useful for inpatient and 81 for outpatient evaluation, and 26 address screening, 12 diagnostic evaluation, 20 management, and 21 follow-up. These quality indicators provide evidence-explicit tools for measuring processes critical to ensuring high-quality supportive cancer care. Research is needed to characterize adherence to recommended practices and to evaluate the use of these measures in quality improvement efforts. |
| |
| Keywords: | Quality of care supportive care palliative care cancer |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
