{"title":"Measuring and improving quality in esophageal care and swallowing disorders.","authors":"Alexander T Reddy, Joshua P Lee, David A Leiman","doi":"10.1093/dote/doae013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Evaluating clinical care through quality-related metrics is increasingly common. There are now numerous quality statements and indicators related to the medical management of benign and pre-malignant esophageal diseases. Expert consensus leveraging evidence-based recommendations from published society guidelines has been the most frequently used basis for developing esophageal quality statements. While surgical care of patients with esophageal malignancies, including squamous cell carcinoma, has also been developed, those related to benign esophageal disease now include domains of diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring for gastroesophageal reflux disease, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), achalasia, and Barrett's esophagus (BE). Several recent studies evaluating adherence to quality metrics affirm substantial variation in practice patterns with opportunities for improvement in care across esophageal diseases. In particular, patient education regarding treatment options in achalasia, frequency of esophageal biopsies among patients with dysphagia to evaluate for EoE, and endoscopic evaluation within a BE segment are areas identified to have need for improvement. As the management of esophageal diseases becomes more complex and interdisciplinary, adherence to quality metrics may be a source of standardization and improvement in delivery and ultimately patient outcomes. Indeed, the development of national quality databases has resulted in a significant growth in the use of these metrics for quality improvement activities and may form the basis for future inclusion in quality reporting and payment programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":54277,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Esophagus","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diseases of the Esophagus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doae013","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Evaluating clinical care through quality-related metrics is increasingly common. There are now numerous quality statements and indicators related to the medical management of benign and pre-malignant esophageal diseases. Expert consensus leveraging evidence-based recommendations from published society guidelines has been the most frequently used basis for developing esophageal quality statements. While surgical care of patients with esophageal malignancies, including squamous cell carcinoma, has also been developed, those related to benign esophageal disease now include domains of diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring for gastroesophageal reflux disease, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), achalasia, and Barrett's esophagus (BE). Several recent studies evaluating adherence to quality metrics affirm substantial variation in practice patterns with opportunities for improvement in care across esophageal diseases. In particular, patient education regarding treatment options in achalasia, frequency of esophageal biopsies among patients with dysphagia to evaluate for EoE, and endoscopic evaluation within a BE segment are areas identified to have need for improvement. As the management of esophageal diseases becomes more complex and interdisciplinary, adherence to quality metrics may be a source of standardization and improvement in delivery and ultimately patient outcomes. Indeed, the development of national quality databases has resulted in a significant growth in the use of these metrics for quality improvement activities and may form the basis for future inclusion in quality reporting and payment programs.
通过与质量相关的指标来评估临床护理越来越普遍。目前有许多与良性和恶性前食管疾病医疗管理相关的质量声明和指标。专家一致认为,制定食管质量声明最常用的依据是已出版的学会指南中的循证建议。虽然食管恶性肿瘤(包括鳞状细胞癌)患者的手术治疗也已制定,但与良性食管疾病相关的声明现在包括胃食管反流病、嗜酸性粒细胞食管炎(EoE)、贲门失弛缓症和巴雷特食管(BE)的诊断、治疗和监测领域。最近的几项研究对质量指标的遵守情况进行了评估,结果表明在食管疾病的治疗过程中,实践模式存在很大差异,有改进的余地。特别是,有关贲门失弛缓症治疗方案的患者教育、吞咽困难患者进行食管活检以评估贲门失弛缓症的频率,以及对 BE 病变进行内镜评估,都是需要改进的方面。随着食管疾病的治疗变得越来越复杂和跨学科,对质量标准的遵守可能是标准化、改善治疗效果并最终改善患者预后的源泉。事实上,国家质量数据库的开发已使这些指标在质量改进活动中的使用显著增加,并可能成为未来纳入质量报告和支付计划的基础。