Process areas for improvement ID'd in early prostate cancer

Process areas for improvement ID'd in early prostate cancer
For men with early prostate cancer undergoing expectant management, compliance with RAND structural indicators is high, but there is considerable variability in compliance with process indicators, according to a study published in the September issue of The Journal of Urology.

(HealthDay) -- For men with early prostate cancer undergoing expectant management, compliance with RAND structural indicators is high, but there is considerable variability in compliance with process indicators, according to a study published in the September issue of The Journal of Urology.

Jamie Ritchey, M.P.H., from the American College of Surgeons in Chicago, and colleagues abstracted medical records data and measured compliance with the RAND-developed quality indicators (structure and process). Data were reviewed for 13,876 men with early-stage prostate cancer undergoing expectant management in 2000 to 2001.

The researchers found that there was high compliance with structural indicators (greater than 80 percent), while compliance with process indicators varied (19 to 87 percent). Differences in process indicators were seen for models based on hospital type and , but not for age, race, or .

"Using the RAND quality indicators, this study revealed several process areas for quality improvement among men with early-stage prostate cancer on expectant management in the United States," the authors write. "Efforts to improve the quality of early-stage care need to move beyond the paradigm of age, race, and insurance status."

One author disclosed financial ties to diagnostics manufacturers.

More information: Abstract
Full Text
Editorial (subscription or payment may be required)

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Recommended for you

70-gene signature not cost-effective in breast cancer

Oct 18, 2014

(HealthDay)—For patients with node-negative breast cancer (NNBC), the 70-gene signature is unlikely to be cost-effective for guiding adjuvant chemotherapy decision making, according to a study published ...

User comments