Publicatiedatum
Naam tijdschrift
Journal of neuro-oncology
Background: Quality Indicators (QIs) are important tools to assess the quality and variability of oncological care. However, their application in neuro-oncology is limited so far. The objective of this study was to develop a set of QIs for glioma, covering process and outcome indicators.
Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify both QIs in the field of adult glioma care, and guidelines or recommendations that could be translated into QIs. Also reports from national and international healthcare agencies and scientific associations ("grey literature") were taken into account. After conversion of these recommendations into QIs, merging with existing QIs found in the literature and rationalization, a two-round Delphi survey was conducted to gain consensus on relevance for the proposed QIs.
Results: In total 240 recommendations and 30 QIs were retrieved from the literature. After conversion, merging and rationalization, 147 QIs were evaluated in the Delphi survey and eventually consensus was gained on 47 QIs in the following 7 domains: Diagnosis and Imaging, Surgery, Pathology, Radio/Chemotherapy, Recurrence, Supportive Treatments (Epilepsy, Thromboembolism, Steroid Use and Rehabilitation) and Survival.
Conclusion: This study defined a set of 47 QIs for assessing quality of care in adult glioma patients, distributed amongst 7 crucial phases in the patient's care trajectory. These QIs are readily applicable for use in diverse health care systems, depending on the availability of population-based health care data enabling (inter)national benchmarking.
Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify both QIs in the field of adult glioma care, and guidelines or recommendations that could be translated into QIs. Also reports from national and international healthcare agencies and scientific associations ("grey literature") were taken into account. After conversion of these recommendations into QIs, merging with existing QIs found in the literature and rationalization, a two-round Delphi survey was conducted to gain consensus on relevance for the proposed QIs.
Results: In total 240 recommendations and 30 QIs were retrieved from the literature. After conversion, merging and rationalization, 147 QIs were evaluated in the Delphi survey and eventually consensus was gained on 47 QIs in the following 7 domains: Diagnosis and Imaging, Surgery, Pathology, Radio/Chemotherapy, Recurrence, Supportive Treatments (Epilepsy, Thromboembolism, Steroid Use and Rehabilitation) and Survival.
Conclusion: This study defined a set of 47 QIs for assessing quality of care in adult glioma patients, distributed amongst 7 crucial phases in the patient's care trajectory. These QIs are readily applicable for use in diverse health care systems, depending on the availability of population-based health care data enabling (inter)national benchmarking.