Measuring the diagnostic management and follow-up imaging for glioma patients across Belgian hospitals between 2016 and 2019

IF 2.9 2区医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY

Cancer Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-30 DOI:10.1002/cam4.70045

Dimitri Vanhauwaert, Katrijn Vanschoenbeek, Frank Weyns, Ludo Vanopdenbosch, Ann Tieleman, Alex Michotte, Karolien Goffin, Cindy De Gendt, Steven De Vleeschouwer, Tom Boterberg

{"title":"Measuring the diagnostic management and follow-up imaging for glioma patients across Belgian hospitals between 2016 and 2019","authors":"Dimitri Vanhauwaert, Katrijn Vanschoenbeek, Frank Weyns, Ludo Vanopdenbosch, Ann Tieleman, Alex Michotte, Karolien Goffin, Cindy De Gendt, Steven De Vleeschouwer, Tom Boterberg","doi":"10.1002/cam4.70045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to assess the diagnostic management and follow-up imaging for glioma patients across Belgian hospitals by calculating process indicators.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients with newly diagnosed glioma in Belgium (2016–2019) were selected from the Belgian Cancer Registry. The National Social Security Number served as unique patient identifier, linking the Registry to vital status and reimbursement data. Nine measurable process related to diagnosis and follow-up imaging were identified, with reformulations for 7 due to data limitations. For each indicator, technical documentation sheets, containing all required details (rationale, numerator and denominator, target, limitations, benchmarking, subgroup analyses) were developed, reviewed by a multidisciplinary expert panel, and validated in six pilot hospitals. Per indicator, patients were assigned to the most relevant hospital per indicator using allocation algorithms.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Results for process indicators assessing MRI use in glioma diagnosis and follow-up aligned with predefined targets (90%), except for early postoperative MRI (48.5% vs. target 90%). Mandatory reporting of the WHO performance status (89.3% vs. target 100%) and performance of full-spine (43.6% vs. target 90%) and follow-up MRI (73.5% vs. target 90%) in ependymoma were suboptimal. The largest variability across centers was noted for the indicator on early postoperative MRI.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This calculation of process indicators identified opportunities for improvement in diagnosis and follow-up imaging for glioma patients in Belgium. Monitoring indicator results and providing individual feedback reports to the Belgian hospitals invites neuro-oncology care teams and hospital managements to reflect on their results and to take measures to continuously improve care for glioma.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":139,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Medicine","volume":"13 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cam4.70045","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70045","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

This study aimed to assess the diagnostic management and follow-up imaging for glioma patients across Belgian hospitals by calculating process indicators.

Methods

Patients with newly diagnosed glioma in Belgium (2016–2019) were selected from the Belgian Cancer Registry. The National Social Security Number served as unique patient identifier, linking the Registry to vital status and reimbursement data. Nine measurable process related to diagnosis and follow-up imaging were identified, with reformulations for 7 due to data limitations. For each indicator, technical documentation sheets, containing all required details (rationale, numerator and denominator, target, limitations, benchmarking, subgroup analyses) were developed, reviewed by a multidisciplinary expert panel, and validated in six pilot hospitals. Per indicator, patients were assigned to the most relevant hospital per indicator using allocation algorithms.

Results

Results for process indicators assessing MRI use in glioma diagnosis and follow-up aligned with predefined targets (90%), except for early postoperative MRI (48.5% vs. target 90%). Mandatory reporting of the WHO performance status (89.3% vs. target 100%) and performance of full-spine (43.6% vs. target 90%) and follow-up MRI (73.5% vs. target 90%) in ependymoma were suboptimal. The largest variability across centers was noted for the indicator on early postoperative MRI.

Conclusion

This calculation of process indicators identified opportunities for improvement in diagnosis and follow-up imaging for glioma patients in Belgium. Monitoring indicator results and providing individual feedback reports to the Belgian hospitals invites neuro-oncology care teams and hospital managements to reflect on their results and to take measures to continuously improve care for glioma.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

衡量比利时各医院在 2016 年至 2019 年期间对胶质瘤患者的诊断管理和后续成像情况。

研究目的本研究旨在通过计算流程指标，评估比利时各家医院对胶质瘤患者的诊断管理和随访成像情况：从比利时癌症登记处选取比利时新诊断的胶质瘤患者（2016-2019年）。国家社会保障号作为患者的唯一标识符，将登记册与生命状态和报销数据联系起来。确定了九项与诊断和后续成像相关的可测量流程，其中七项因数据限制而重新制定。针对每项指标，都制定了包含所有必要细节（原理、分子和分母、目标、限制、基准、分组分析）的技术文档表，由多学科专家小组进行审核，并在六家试点医院进行验证。根据每个指标，采用分配算法将患者分配到与该指标最相关的医院：结果：评估磁共振成像在胶质瘤诊断和随访中使用情况的流程指标结果符合预定目标（90%），但术后早期磁共振成像除外（48.5%，目标为90%）。强制报告WHO表现状态（89.3%，目标100%）、全脊柱磁共振成像（43.6%，目标90%）和癫痫瘤随访磁共振成像（73.5%，目标90%）的表现均未达到最佳水平。各中心之间差异最大的指标是术后早期磁共振成像：通过对流程指标的计算，发现了比利时胶质瘤患者诊断和随访成像的改进机会。对指标结果进行监测并向比利时医院提供个人反馈报告，有助于神经肿瘤治疗团队和医院管理层对其结果进行反思，并采取措施持续改进胶质瘤治疗。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Cancer Medicine ONCOLOGY-

CiteScore

5.50

自引率

2.50%

发文量

907

审稿时长

19 weeks

期刊介绍： Cancer Medicine is a peer-reviewed, open access, interdisciplinary journal providing rapid publication of research from global biomedical researchers across the cancer sciences. The journal will consider submissions from all oncologic specialties, including, but not limited to, the following areas: Clinical Cancer Research Translational research ∙ clinical trials ∙ chemotherapy ∙ radiation therapy ∙ surgical therapy ∙ clinical observations ∙ clinical guidelines ∙ genetic consultation ∙ ethical considerations Cancer Biology: Molecular biology ∙ cellular biology ∙ molecular genetics ∙ genomics ∙ immunology ∙ epigenetics ∙ metabolic studies ∙ proteomics ∙ cytopathology ∙ carcinogenesis ∙ drug discovery and delivery. Cancer Prevention: Behavioral science ∙ psychosocial studies ∙ screening ∙ nutrition ∙ epidemiology and prevention ∙ community outreach. Bioinformatics: Gene expressions profiles ∙ gene regulation networks ∙ genome bioinformatics ∙ pathwayanalysis ∙ prognostic biomarkers. Cancer Medicine publishes original research articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and research methods papers, along with invited editorials and commentaries. Original research papers must report well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the paper.