ESGO/ESTRO quality indicators for radiation therapy of cervical cancer
•The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) initiated the development of quality indicators (QIs)for radiation therapy of cervical cancer.•QIs were based on scientific evidence and/or expert consensus.•Nineteen structural, proc...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Radiotherapy and oncology 2023-06, Vol.183, p.109589-109589, Article 109589 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | •The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) initiated the development of quality indicators (QIs)for radiation therapy of cervical cancer.•QIs were based on scientific evidence and/or expert consensus.•Nineteen structural, process and outcome indicators were defined: 6 QIs are general requirements, 10 QIs are related to treatment indicators and 2 refer to patient outcomes.
The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) has previously defined and established a list of quality indicators for the surgical treatment of cervical cancer. As a continuation of this effort to improve overall quality of care for cervical cancer patients across all aspects, ESGO and the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) initiated the development of quality indicators for radiation therapy of cervical cancer.
To develop a list of quality indicators for radiation therapy of cervical cancer that can be used to audit and improve clinical practice by giving to practitioners and administrators a quantitative basis to improve care and organizational processes, notably for recognition of the increased complexity of modern external radiotherapy and brachytherapy techniques.
Quality indicators were based on scientific evidence and/or expert consensus. The development process included a systematic literature search for identification of potential quality indicators and documentation of scientific evidence, consensus meetings of a group of international experts, an internal validation process, and external review by a large international panel of clinicians (n = 99).
Using a structured format, each quality indicator has a description specifying what the indicator is measuring. Measurability specifications are detailed to define how the quality indicators will be measured in practice. Targets were also defined for specifying the level which each unit or center should be aiming to achieve. Nineteen structural, process, and outcome indicators were defined. Quality indicators 1–6 are general requirements related to pretreatment workup, time to treatment, upfront radiation therapy, and overall management, including active participation in clinical research and the decision making process within a structured multidisciplinary team. Quality indicators 7–17 are related to treatment indicators. Quality indicators 18 and 19 are related to patient outcomes.
This set of quality indicators is a major instrument |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0167-8140 1879-0887 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109589 |