Article

Patient-centered quality indicators for pulmonary resection.

Division of General Thoracic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.
The Annals of thoracic surgery (Impact Factor: 3.45). 10/2008; 86(3):927-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2008.04.021
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Quality of care is increasingly scrutinized. However, no standard quality measures exist for surgical care of patients undergoing pulmonary resection.
Our thoracic surgical team developed a set of patient-centered quality of care measures specific to patients undergoing pulmonary resection. Measures were chosen that demonstrated evidence-based preoperative assessment, adequate mediastinal staging, and interventions to prevent and expeditiously treat postoperative morbidity. Medical records of all patients undergoing pulmonary resection in 2005 were analyzed.
In all, 606 patients (men:women = 330:276) underwent 628 pulmonary resections. Median age was 65.8 years (range, 2 to 93). Operative mortality was 2.1%. Pulmonary function testing within 1 year before surgery was documented in 74.2%. Electrocardiogram within 90 days before surgery was documented in 81.6% of patients 50 years and older. Smoking history was documented in all patients, and smoking cessation consultation was offered to 85.7% of current smokers. Deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis was implemented in 99.7%. Mediastinal staging was documented in 94.0% of patients undergoing lung cancer resection (n = 333). Postoperatively, 92.4% of patients used incentive spirometry. Atrial fibrillation treatment occurred within 45 minutes of onset in 70.5%. Postoperative analog pain scores were above 6 in only 7.4% of assessments; treatment and reassessment occurred within 2 hours in 81.0%. Follow-up planning was documented at hospital discharge in 100%. No National Quality Forum "never events" occurred.
Patient-centered and clinically relevant quality measures can be developed and evaluated in general thoracic surgery. This panel of quality indicators highlights and guide areas for potential improvement in the care of patients undergoing pulmonary resection.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
128 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lung cancer remains a major disease burden in Victoria (Australia) and requires a complex and multidisciplinary approach to ensure optimal care and outcomes. To date, no uniform mechanism is available to capture standardized population-based outcomes and thereby provide benchmarking. The establishment of such a data platform is, therefore, a primary requisite to enable description of process and outcome in lung cancer care and to drive improvement in the quality of care provided to individuals with lung cancer.
    Beiträge zur Klinik der Tuberkulose 06/2014; 192(5). · 2.17 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To improve prognosis and quality of lung cancer care the Danish Lung Cancer Group has developed a strategy consisting of national clinical guidelines and a clinical quality and research database. The first edition of our guidelines was published in 1998 and our national lung cancer registry was opened for registrations in 2000. This article describes methods and results obtained by multidisciplinary collaboration and illustrates how quality of lung cancer care can be improved by establishing and monitoring result and process indicators. A wide range of indicators was established, validated, and monitored. By registration of all lung cancer patients since the year 2000, data on more than 40,000 patients have been included in the database. Results are reported periodically/quarterly and submitted to formal auditing on an annual basis. Improvements in all outcome indicators are documented and statistically significant. Thus the 1-year overall survival rate has increased between 2003 and 2011 from 36.6% to 42.7%, the 2-year survival rate from 19.8% to 24.3%, and the 5-year survival rate from 9.8% to 12.1%. Five-year survival after surgical resection has increased from 39.5% to 48.1%. Improvements of waiting times, accordance between cTNM and pTNM, and resection rates are documented. The Danish experience shows that a national quality management system including national guidelines, a database with high data quality, frequent reports, audit and commitment from all stakeholders can contribute to improve clinical practice, improve core results, and reduce regional differences.
    Journal of thoracic oncology: official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer 10/2013; 8(10):1238-47. · 4.55 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We compared the clinical outcomes and changes in pulmonary function test (PFT) results after segmentectomy or lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer. The retrospective study included 212 patients who had undergone segmentectomy (group S) and 2336 patients who had undergone lobectomy (group L) from 1997 to 2012. The follow-up and medical record data were collected. We used all the longitudinal PFT data within 24 months postoperatively and performed linear mixed modeling. We analyzed the 5-year overall and disease-free survival in stage IA patients. We used propensity score case matching to minimize the bias due to imbalanced group comparisons. During the perioperative period, 1 death (0.4%) in group S and 7 (0.3%) in group L occurred. The hospital stay for the 2 groups was similar (median, 5.0 vs 5.0 days; range, 2-99 vs 2-58). The mean overall and disease-free survival period of those with T1a after segmentectomy or lobectomy seemed to be similar (4.2 vs 4.5 years, P = .06; and 4.1 vs 4.4 years, P = .07, respectively). Compared with segmentectomy, lobectomy yielded marginally significantly better overall (4.4 vs 3.9 years, P = .05) and disease-free (4.1 vs 3.6 years; P = .05) survival in those with T1b. We did not find a significantly different effect on the PFTs after segmentectomy or lobectomy. Both surgical types were safe. We would advocate lobectomy for patients with stage IA disease, especially those with T1b. A retrospective study with a large sample size and more detailed information should be conducted for PFT evaluation, with additional stratification by lobe and laterality.
    The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery 03/2014; · 3.41 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
1 Download