Quality indicators for breast cancer care: A systematic review

Maes‐Carballo, Marta; Gómez-Fandiño, Yolanda; Reinoso-Hermida, Ayla; Estrada-López, Carlos Roberto; Martín-Díaz, Manuel; Khan, Khalid S.; Bueno‐Cavanillas, Aurora

doi:10.1016/j.breast.2021.06.013

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most of the various QI measurements were categorized as process measurements. This finding is consistent with those of previous reviews on non-cardiovascular diseases [ 44 , 45 ]. The QI measurements in our study were used in a variety of situations (upon admission, acute setting, during hospitalization / at discharge).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Quality indicators for acute cardiovascular diseases: a scoping review

Kanaoka

Iwanaga

Tsujimoto³

et al. 2022

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Although many quality indicator (QI) sets have been developed for acute cardiovascular diseases, a comprehensive summary is lacking. In this scoping review we aimed to summarize the available evidence on the QI sets for acute cardiovascular diseases, and assess the QI set development process. We followed the Joanna Briggs Institute framework and the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. Methods We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and major international guidelines on QIs for acute major cardiovascular diseases. The study included articles published after 2000. Results Among the 3112 articles screened, 18 were included in this scoping review. Among the 18 articles included, 12 were on acute coronary syndrome (ACS), five on acute heart failure (AHF), and two on acute aortic dissection (AAD); one article included QIs for both ACS and AHF. Only four of these studies conducted a systematic search with a search strategy. From the 18 articles, 268 QIs containing duplication between articles were identified (191 QIs were for ACS, 57 were for AHF, and 20 were for AAD) and QI measurements varied across articles. Conclusions This scoping review provides a comprehensive list of QIs for acute cardiovascular diseases. Our results may be helpful to clinicians and organizations seeking to develop QIs for acute cardiovascular care in the future.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Quality indicators for acute cardiovascular diseases: a scoping review

Kanaoka

Iwanaga

Tsujimoto³

et al. 2022

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2). This nding is similar to a recent study by Maes-Carballo et al, (2021) which also identi ed a majority of process indicators (11).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Existing diagnostic and treatment guidelines and protocols can be evaluated together with QIs to measure the extent to which practice conforms to the established indicators in order to guide future improvement. A recent publication reveals more countries are now requiring an established clinical pathway for breast cancer care to achieve quality and excellence of care (11).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of Quality Indicators in the Management of Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review

Atuwo-Ampoh

Ofori

Engil-Hills

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Breast cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death. Current evidence suggests a gap between what is understood to be standard breast cancer management and what happens in clinical practice. The development and implementation of breast quality indicators (QIs) for breast cancer management is one way to achieve better care. This systematic review aimed to identify QIs developed for the management of breast cancer and to summarize characteristics and range of measures uncovered. Methods Studies related to the development of QIs for management and monitoring of breast cancer care were systematically searched, extracted and reviewed using four electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library) following a Prospero Protocol Registration (CRD42020207945). The study was reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for the Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). This review reported on the development of QIs in the management of breast cancer and Donabedian’s framework was adopted as the analytical framework. Results Out of 1161 potentially relevant articles identified, eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were directly concerned with QI development for breast cancer care. These included two papers from China and one each from; The Netherlands, Belgium, Scotland and Canada. The remaining two were a collaboration among the European Society of Breast cancer Specialists (EUSOMA). The methods used by these studies to identify and develop QIs included a comprehensive literature review, medical records review, clinical guidelines, and Delphi consensus using an expert panel discussion. A total of 38 QIs were identified and classified as: structure (n = 3); process (n = 30); and outcome (n = 5). Structure indicators included: the availability of Multi-Disciplinary Team Meeting (MDT), medical records and breast cancer research infrastructure. Process indicators included eight diagnostic QIs, 22 treatment QIs and seven follow-up QIs. The outcome indicator focused mainly on the overall five-year survival statistics. Conclusions The development of QIs appears relevant to monitor clinical management and performance but is currently limited to higher income countries. Development and implementation of QIs in LMICs countries will improve practice.

show abstract

“…In a systematic review of QIs for breast cancer care, not a single identical indicator was found in 22 of the documents analysed. There were only four comparable QIs that appeared more frequently in the analysed documents (8).…”

Section: Quality Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Norwegian Breast Cancer Registry (NBCR): A clinical register that monitors surgical care with the intention to increase the quality of treatment given to breast cancer patients in Norway

Skjerven¹,

Trewin-Nybråten²,

Kjersti³

2022

Nor J Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increased focus on quality indicators and the use of clinical registries for breast cancer has shown higher compliance with recommended treatment in several studies. Norwegian Breast Cancer Registry (NBCR) has presented data on quality indicators since 2015. The registry is 95% complete for surgical treatment during 2015-2021. Over time, increased compliance to recommended surgical therapy has been observed. The completeness of data is, unfortunately, a problem, particularly for breast radiology outside the Norwegian mammography screening program, and for data on oncological treatment. Automation of data capture is a priority at the Cancer Registry of Norway (CRN), with the ongoing INSPIRE (INcreaSe PharmaceutIcal REporting) and SNOMED CT (Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine – Clinical Terms) projects. These projects may add important data and improve the completeness and quality of the NBCR, which is useful for improving the quality of care given to Norwegian breast cancer patients.

show abstract

Quality indicators for breast cancer care: A systematic review

Cited by 16 publications

References 26 publications

Quality indicators for acute cardiovascular diseases: a scoping review

Quality indicators for acute cardiovascular diseases: a scoping review

Development of Quality Indicators in the Management of Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review

The Norwegian Breast Cancer Registry (NBCR): A clinical register that monitors surgical care with the intention to increase the quality of treatment given to breast cancer patients in Norway

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About