Implementing quality metrics in European Cancer Centers (ECCs)

Griesshammer, Ellen; Adam, Henning; Sibert, Nora Tabea; Wesselmann, Simone

doi:10.1007/s00345-020-03165-4

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The likelihood for SSC utilization was found to be lower in Swiss centers than in German centers, even though the certification requirements regarding SSC are the same for both countries. This finding is in line with previous analyses [27] and may be traced back to differences in the healthcare systems. In Switzerland, the legal regulations regarding SSC differ from those in Germany and do not promote in-house services.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Predictors for the utilization of social service counseling by prostate cancer patients

Breidenbach

Sibert

Wesselmann

et al. 2021

Support Care Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Predictors for the utilization of social service counseling by prostate cancer patients

Breidenbach

Sibert

Wesselmann

et al. 2021

Support Care Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This finding was far below those reported in studies in the U.S.A. [ 22 , 39 – 41 ] and in the Netherlands [ 42 ]. Contrary to our study, data from German Prostate Cancer Centers found high guideline-adherence (85.4% in 2017) in terms of delivering RT with HT for locally advanced (T 3-4 N 0 M 0 ) PCa cases [ 43 ]. Similarly, a study based on 70,683 patients treated in certified prostate cancer treatment centers between 2010 and 2013, found high fulfilment of quality requirement for more than 80% of the certified treatment centers [ 44 ].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 94%

“…Similarly, a study based on 70,683 patients treated in certified prostate cancer treatment centers between 2010 and 2013, found high fulfilment of quality requirement for more than 80% of the certified treatment centers [ 44 ]. Our population-based cancer registry data suggest that the target of achieving more than 90% for the use of RT with HT [ 43 ], an important quality indicator of PCa treatment, appears to be off track. In particular, the fact that HT use did not increase after the introduction of the German S3-guideline for Prostate Cancer treatment was highly unanticipated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suboptimal use of hormonal therapy among German men with localized high-risk prostate Cancer during 2005 to 2015: analysis of registry data

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study assesses the use of hormonal therapy to treat high-risk localized prostate cancer (HRLPCa) cases diagnosed between 2005 and 2015. Methods All N0-XM0 with ≥T3a, or PCa cases with poorly differentiated feature (equivalent to Gleason score ≥ 8), diagnosed between 2005 and 2015 were extracted from German population-based cancer registries. Cases treated by surgery or chemotherapy were excluded. Description of hormonal therapy use by HRLPCa cases’ profile was presented. Relative risk (RR) was computed with a log-link function to identify factors associated with hormonal therapy use among radiotherapy-treated HRLPCa cases. Results A total of 5361 HRLPCa cases were analyzed. Only 27.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 26.4–28.8%) of the HRLPCa cases received hormonal therapy in combination with radiotherapy. The use of combined hormonal therapy and radiotherapy varied from 19.8% in Saxony to 47.8% in Schleswig-Holstein. Application of hormonal therapy was higher for the locally advanced cases compared to the poorly differentiated cases (relative risk [RR] = 1.28; 95%CI: 1.19, 1.37). Older patients showed a slightly increased use of hormonal therapy (RR for a 10-year age increase = 1.09; 95%CI: 1.02, 1.16). Compared to PCa cases from the most affluent residential areas, cases from the least affluent (RR = 0.71; 95%CI: 0.55, 0.92) and medium (RR = 0.75; 95%CI: 0.58, 0.96) areas had decreased use of hormonal therapy. The introduction of the German S3-guideline did not make a marked difference in the uptake of both hormonal therapy and radiotherapy (RR = 1.02; 95%CI: 0.95, 1.09). Conclusion This study found a low use of hormonal therapy among HRLPCa patients treated without surgery. The introduction of the German S3-guideline for prostate cancer treatment does not seem to have impacted hormonal therapy use.

show abstract

“…Health care systems worldwide aim to improve cancer care quality by means of the accreditation or certification of specialized hospitals [ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ]. To promote optimal, guideline-based therapy pathways, a certification program for treating facilities has been established in Germany.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of Colorectal Cancer in Certified Centers: Results of a Large German Registry Study Focusing on Long-Term Survival

Völkel,

Gerken,

Kleihues-van Tol

et al. 2023

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Background: The WiZen study is the largest study so far to analyze the effect of the certification of designated cancer centers on survival in Germany. This certification program is provided by the German Cancer Society (GCS) and represents one of the largest oncologic certification programs worldwide. Currently, about 50% of colorectal cancer patients in Germany are treated in certified centers. (2) Methods: All analyses are based on population-based clinical cancer registry data of 47.440 colorectal cancer (ICD-10-GM C18/C20) patients treated between 2009 and 2017. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OAS) after treatment at certified cancer centers compared to treatment at other hospitals; the secondary endpoint was recurrence-free survival. Statistical methods included Kaplan–Meier analysis and multivariable Cox regression. (3) Results: Treatment at certified hospitals was associated with significant advantages concerning 5-year overall survival (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89, 0.96, adjusted for a broad range of confounders) for colon cancer patients. Concentrating on UICC stage I–III patients, for whom curative treatment is possible, the survival benefit was even larger (colon cancer: HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84, 0.94; rectum cancer: HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84, 0.97). (4) Conclusions: These results encourage future efforts for further implementation of the certification program. Patients with colorectal cancer should preferably be directed to certified centers.

show abstract

Implementing quality metrics in European Cancer Centers (ECCs)

Cited by 8 publications

References 11 publications

Predictors for the utilization of social service counseling by prostate cancer patients

Predictors for the utilization of social service counseling by prostate cancer patients

Suboptimal use of hormonal therapy among German men with localized high-risk prostate Cancer during 2005 to 2015: analysis of registry data

Treatment of Colorectal Cancer in Certified Centers: Results of a Large German Registry Study Focusing on Long-Term Survival

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About