Quality Indicators for Global Benchmarking of Localized Prostate Cancer Management

Fanny Sampurno, Jia Zheng, Lydia Di Stefano, Jeremy L. Millar, Claire Foster, Ferran Fuedea, Celestia Higano, Hartwig Hulan, Stephen Mark, Caroline Moore, Alison Richardson, Frank Sullivan, Neil S. Wenger, Daniela Wittmann, Sue Evans

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: We sought to develop a core set of clinical indicators to enable international benchmarking of localized prostate cancer management using data available in the TrueNTH Global Registry. Materials and Methods: An international expert panel completed an online survey and participated in a face-to-face meeting. Participants included 3 urologists, 3 radiation oncologists, 2 psychologists, 1 medical oncologist, 1 nurse and 1 epidemiologist with prostate cancer expertise from a total of 7 countries. Current guidelines on prostate cancer treatment and potential quality indicators were identified from a literature review. These potential indicators were refined and developed through a modified Delphi process during which each panelist independently and repeatedly rated each indicator based on importance (satisfying the indicator demonstrated a provision of high quality care) and feasibility (the likelihood that data used to construct the indicator could be collected at a population level). The main outcome measure was items with panel agreement indicated by a disagreement index less 1, median importance 8.5 or greater and median feasibility 9 or greater. Results: The expert panel endorsed 33 indicators. Seven of these 33 prostate cancer quality indicators assessed care relating to diagnosis, 7 assessed primary treatment, 1 assessed salvage treatment and 18 assessed health outcomes. Conclusions: We developed a set of quality indicators to measure prostate cancer care using numerous international evidence-based clinical guidelines. These indicators will be pilot tested in the TrueNTH Global Registry. Reports comparing indicator performance will subsequently be distributed to groups at participating sites with the purpose of improving the consistency and quality of prostate cancer management on a global basis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)319-326
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume200
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2018

Keywords

  • Delphi technique
  • evidence-based medicine
  • health care
  • practice guidelines as topic
  • prostatic neoplasms
  • quality indicators

Cite this

Sampurno, F., Zheng, J., Di Stefano, L., Millar, J. L., Foster, C., Fuedea, F., ... Evans, S. (2018). Quality Indicators for Global Benchmarking of Localized Prostate Cancer Management. Journal of Urology, 200(2), 319-326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.071
Sampurno, Fanny ; Zheng, Jia ; Di Stefano, Lydia ; Millar, Jeremy L. ; Foster, Claire ; Fuedea, Ferran ; Higano, Celestia ; Hulan, Hartwig ; Mark, Stephen ; Moore, Caroline ; Richardson, Alison ; Sullivan, Frank ; Wenger, Neil S. ; Wittmann, Daniela ; Evans, Sue. / Quality Indicators for Global Benchmarking of Localized Prostate Cancer Management. In: Journal of Urology. 2018 ; Vol. 200, No. 2. pp. 319-326.
@article{35f5dfcac12044b7bcd6cf58de11eb40,
title = "Quality Indicators for Global Benchmarking of Localized Prostate Cancer Management",
abstract = "Purpose: We sought to develop a core set of clinical indicators to enable international benchmarking of localized prostate cancer management using data available in the TrueNTH Global Registry. Materials and Methods: An international expert panel completed an online survey and participated in a face-to-face meeting. Participants included 3 urologists, 3 radiation oncologists, 2 psychologists, 1 medical oncologist, 1 nurse and 1 epidemiologist with prostate cancer expertise from a total of 7 countries. Current guidelines on prostate cancer treatment and potential quality indicators were identified from a literature review. These potential indicators were refined and developed through a modified Delphi process during which each panelist independently and repeatedly rated each indicator based on importance (satisfying the indicator demonstrated a provision of high quality care) and feasibility (the likelihood that data used to construct the indicator could be collected at a population level). The main outcome measure was items with panel agreement indicated by a disagreement index less 1, median importance 8.5 or greater and median feasibility 9 or greater. Results: The expert panel endorsed 33 indicators. Seven of these 33 prostate cancer quality indicators assessed care relating to diagnosis, 7 assessed primary treatment, 1 assessed salvage treatment and 18 assessed health outcomes. Conclusions: We developed a set of quality indicators to measure prostate cancer care using numerous international evidence-based clinical guidelines. These indicators will be pilot tested in the TrueNTH Global Registry. Reports comparing indicator performance will subsequently be distributed to groups at participating sites with the purpose of improving the consistency and quality of prostate cancer management on a global basis.",
keywords = "Delphi technique, evidence-based medicine, health care, practice guidelines as topic, prostatic neoplasms, quality indicators",
author = "Fanny Sampurno and Jia Zheng and {Di Stefano}, Lydia and Millar, {Jeremy L.} and Claire Foster and Ferran Fuedea and Celestia Higano and Hartwig Hulan and Stephen Mark and Caroline Moore and Alison Richardson and Frank Sullivan and Wenger, {Neil S.} and Daniela Wittmann and Sue Evans",
year = "2018",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.071",
language = "English",
volume = "200",
pages = "319--326",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "American Urological Association",
number = "2",

}

Sampurno, F, Zheng, J, Di Stefano, L, Millar, JL, Foster, C, Fuedea, F, Higano, C, Hulan, H, Mark, S, Moore, C, Richardson, A, Sullivan, F, Wenger, NS, Wittmann, D & Evans, S 2018, 'Quality Indicators for Global Benchmarking of Localized Prostate Cancer Management', Journal of Urology, vol. 200, no. 2, pp. 319-326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.071

Quality Indicators for Global Benchmarking of Localized Prostate Cancer Management. / Sampurno, Fanny; Zheng, Jia; Di Stefano, Lydia; Millar, Jeremy L.; Foster, Claire; Fuedea, Ferran; Higano, Celestia; Hulan, Hartwig; Mark, Stephen; Moore, Caroline; Richardson, Alison; Sullivan, Frank; Wenger, Neil S.; Wittmann, Daniela; Evans, Sue.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 200, No. 2, 08.2018, p. 319-326.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quality Indicators for Global Benchmarking of Localized Prostate Cancer Management

AU - Sampurno, Fanny

AU - Zheng, Jia

AU - Di Stefano, Lydia

AU - Millar, Jeremy L.

AU - Foster, Claire

AU - Fuedea, Ferran

AU - Higano, Celestia

AU - Hulan, Hartwig

AU - Mark, Stephen

AU - Moore, Caroline

AU - Richardson, Alison

AU - Sullivan, Frank

AU - Wenger, Neil S.

AU - Wittmann, Daniela

AU - Evans, Sue

PY - 2018/8

Y1 - 2018/8

N2 - Purpose: We sought to develop a core set of clinical indicators to enable international benchmarking of localized prostate cancer management using data available in the TrueNTH Global Registry. Materials and Methods: An international expert panel completed an online survey and participated in a face-to-face meeting. Participants included 3 urologists, 3 radiation oncologists, 2 psychologists, 1 medical oncologist, 1 nurse and 1 epidemiologist with prostate cancer expertise from a total of 7 countries. Current guidelines on prostate cancer treatment and potential quality indicators were identified from a literature review. These potential indicators were refined and developed through a modified Delphi process during which each panelist independently and repeatedly rated each indicator based on importance (satisfying the indicator demonstrated a provision of high quality care) and feasibility (the likelihood that data used to construct the indicator could be collected at a population level). The main outcome measure was items with panel agreement indicated by a disagreement index less 1, median importance 8.5 or greater and median feasibility 9 or greater. Results: The expert panel endorsed 33 indicators. Seven of these 33 prostate cancer quality indicators assessed care relating to diagnosis, 7 assessed primary treatment, 1 assessed salvage treatment and 18 assessed health outcomes. Conclusions: We developed a set of quality indicators to measure prostate cancer care using numerous international evidence-based clinical guidelines. These indicators will be pilot tested in the TrueNTH Global Registry. Reports comparing indicator performance will subsequently be distributed to groups at participating sites with the purpose of improving the consistency and quality of prostate cancer management on a global basis.

AB - Purpose: We sought to develop a core set of clinical indicators to enable international benchmarking of localized prostate cancer management using data available in the TrueNTH Global Registry. Materials and Methods: An international expert panel completed an online survey and participated in a face-to-face meeting. Participants included 3 urologists, 3 radiation oncologists, 2 psychologists, 1 medical oncologist, 1 nurse and 1 epidemiologist with prostate cancer expertise from a total of 7 countries. Current guidelines on prostate cancer treatment and potential quality indicators were identified from a literature review. These potential indicators were refined and developed through a modified Delphi process during which each panelist independently and repeatedly rated each indicator based on importance (satisfying the indicator demonstrated a provision of high quality care) and feasibility (the likelihood that data used to construct the indicator could be collected at a population level). The main outcome measure was items with panel agreement indicated by a disagreement index less 1, median importance 8.5 or greater and median feasibility 9 or greater. Results: The expert panel endorsed 33 indicators. Seven of these 33 prostate cancer quality indicators assessed care relating to diagnosis, 7 assessed primary treatment, 1 assessed salvage treatment and 18 assessed health outcomes. Conclusions: We developed a set of quality indicators to measure prostate cancer care using numerous international evidence-based clinical guidelines. These indicators will be pilot tested in the TrueNTH Global Registry. Reports comparing indicator performance will subsequently be distributed to groups at participating sites with the purpose of improving the consistency and quality of prostate cancer management on a global basis.

KW - Delphi technique

KW - evidence-based medicine

KW - health care

KW - practice guidelines as topic

KW - prostatic neoplasms

KW - quality indicators

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85048702139&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.071

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.071

M3 - Article

C2 - 29477721

AN - SCOPUS:85048702139

VL - 200

SP - 319

EP - 326

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 2

ER -

Sampurno F, Zheng J, Di Stefano L, Millar JL, Foster C, Fuedea F et al. Quality Indicators for Global Benchmarking of Localized Prostate Cancer Management. Journal of Urology. 2018 Aug;200(2):319-326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.071