WSLHD
Skip navigation
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://wslhd.intersearch.com.au/wslhdjspui/handle/1/9574
TitleMeasurement that matters: A systematic review and modified Delphi of multidisciplinary colorectal cancer quality indicators
Authors: Donnelly, C.;Or, M.;Toh, J.;Thevaraja, M.;Janssen, A.;Shaw, T.;Pathma-Nathan, N.;Harnett, P.;Chiew, K. L.;Vinod, S.;Sundaresan, P.
WSLHD Author: Or, Michelle;Toh, James;Pathma-Nathan, Nimalan;Harnett, Paul;Sundaresan, Puma
Subjects: Quality Indicators, Health Care;Australia;Consensus;Colorectal Neoplasms;Delphi Technique
Issue Date: 2024
Citation: Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology 20(2):259-274, 2024
Abstract: AIM: To develop a priority set of quality indicators (QIs) for use by colorectal cancer (CRC) multidisciplinary teams (MDTs). METHODS: The review search strategy was executed in four databases from 2009-August 2019. Two reviewers screened abstracts/manuscripts. Candidate QIs and characteristics were extracted using a tailored abstraction tool and assessed for scientific soundness. To prioritize candidate indicators, a modified Delphi consensus process was conducted. Consensus was sought over two rounds; (1) multidisciplinary expert workshops to identify relevance to Australian CRC MDTs, and (2) an online survey to prioritize QIs by clinical importance. RESULTS: A total of 93 unique QIs were extracted from 118 studies and categorized into domains of care within the CRC patient pathway. Approximately half the QIs involved more than one discipline (52.7%). One-third of QIs related to surgery of primary CRC (31.2%). QIs on supportive care (6%) and neoadjuvant therapy (6%) were limited. In the Delphi Round 1, workshop participants (n = 12) assessed 93 QIs and produced consensus on retaining 49 QIs including six new QIs. In Round 2, survey participants (n = 44) rated QIs and prioritized a final 26 QIs across all domains of care and disciplines with a concordance level > 80%. Participants represented all MDT disciplines, predominantly surgical (32%), radiation (23%) and medical (20%) oncology, and nursing (18%), across six Australian states, with an even spread of experience level. CONCLUSION: This study identified a large number of existing CRC QIs and prioritized the most clinically relevant QIs for use by Australian MDTs to measure and monitor their performance. Copyright 2023 The Authors. Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
URI: https://wslhd.intersearch.com.au/wslhdjspui/handle/1/9574
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajco.13917
Journal: Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology
Type: Journal Article
Study or Trial: Systematic Review
Department: Radiation Oncology Network
Surgery
Facility: Westmead
Keywords: Oncology
Appears in Collections:Westmead Hospital 2019 - 2024

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in the repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.