Breast Cancer Care Quality Indicators in Spain: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Breast cancer (BC) management care requires an increment in quality. An initiative to improve the BC quality care is registered, and quality indicators (QIs) are studied. We appraised the appearance of QIs and their standards systematically in Spain. A prospective systematic search (Prospero no: CRD42021228867) for clinical pathways and integrated breast cancer care processes was conducted through databases and the World Wide Web in February 2021. Duplicate data extraction was performed with 98% reviewer agreement. Seventy-four QIs (QI per document mean: 11; standard deviation: 10.59) were found in 15 documents. The Catalonian document had the highest number of QIs (n = 30). No QI appeared in all the documents. There were 9/74 QIs covering structure (12.16%), 53/74 covering process (71.62%), and 12/74 covering outcome (16.22%). A total of 22/66 (33.33%) process and outcome QIs did not set a minimum standard of care. QIs related to primary care, patient satisfaction, and shared decision making were deficient. Most of the documents established a BC QI standard for compliance, but the high variability hinders the comparison of outcomes. Establishing a consensus-based set of QIs needs urgent attention.

Evaluation of Quality Indicators of Breast Cancer Management at a Tertiary Cancer Center in Nepal

“…Similarly, a set of QIs were identified in a Spanish study that served as a basis of strategy for benchmarking oncology services across Spanish hospitals to improve quality of care. 15 …”

“…13,14 Similarly, a set of QIs were identified in a Spanish study that served as a basis of strategy for benchmarking oncology services across Spanish hospitals to improve quality of care. 15 In a Norwegian study, clinical breast cancer registry data from 2012 to 2016 were used to estimate QIs. Increased compliance to recommended treatment has been observed during the registry years.…”

Women’s Health and Gynecology: Old Challenges and New Insights

“…Healthcare management of complex diseases, such as most gynecological and obstetric diseases, is becoming more intricate and therefore must be based on the best evidence, with the highest standards in quality of care and patient safety and aim to maximize patients’ value and expectations [ 27 ]. Maes-Carballo et al [ 28 ] report significant heterogeneity in the quality-of-care indicators proposed to assess the quality of care in breast cancer, making comparisons of results across populations or hospitals difficult, and highlighting relevant discrepancies among the studied integrated healthcare processes and clinical pathways. Quality indicators should be updated as medical care technology provides new alternatives for the care of patients with complex diseases, such as breast cancer.…”