4.3 Article

Establishing metastatic prostate cancer quality indicators using a modified Delphi approach

Journal

CLINICAL GENITOURINARY CANCER
Volume 20, Issue 2, Pages E151-E157

Publisher

CIG MEDIA GROUP, LP
DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2021.11.018

Keywords

Expert panel; Quality of care; Metastatic disease; Multidisciplinary; Survey

Funding

  1. Movember Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study developed a set of international quality indicators specifically for the management of metastatic prostate cancer. The indicators cover various aspects including general management, therapies, complications, and patient-reported quality of life. They can be used to compare the quality of care provided by different institutions and identify areas for improvement.
There has been no previous set of quality indicators (Qls) regarding the management of men with metastatic prostate cancer. Using a modified Delphi process, a panel of fourteen multidisciplinary experts identified 23 quality indicators. The QIs will enable comparison between the quality of care delivered by institutions and can be used to identify potential targets for improvements. Background: There is variation in the care provided to men with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa). There has been no previous set of quality indicators (QIs) regarding the management of men with mPCa. The objective of this study is to develop a set of international mPCa-specific QIs, which will enable global benchmarking of quality of care.Materials and methods: Potential QIs were identified through a literature review. Fourteen multidisciplinary mPCa experts (representing medical and radiation oncology, nursing, psychology, palliative care and urology) from eight countries participated in a modified Delphi process, which consisted of two online surveys, one face-to-face meeting and two teleconferences. Panelists were asked to rate each indicator's importance and feasibility on a Likert scale from 1 to 9. Indicators that received median importance and median feasibility scores >= 7.5, and a disagreement index <1 for both measures, on the final round of voting were included in the final set. Results: There was consensus on 23 QIs out of total of 662. Four regarding general management, 12 therapies, three complications and four patient-reported quality of life. One of the inherent limitations of the Delphi process is that there is a small expert panel involved. Conclusion: The quality indicator set defined by our process for management of men with mPCa will enable greater understanding of the standard and variation of care globally and will promote consistency of good practice. Future directions will include retrospective evaluation for compliance with these indicators, as well as prospective monitoring. (C) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available