Dataset Information

Measuring colposcopy quality in Canada: development of population-based indicators.

ABSTRACT: Background:Colposcopy is a key part of cervical cancer control. As cervical cancer screening and prevention strategies evolve, monitoring colposcopy performance will become even more critical. In the present paper, we describe population-based colposcopy quality indicators that are recommended for ongoing measurement by cervical cancer screening programs in Canada. Methods:The Pan-Canadian Cervical Cancer Screening Network established a multidisciplinary expert working group to identify population-based colposcopy quality indicators. A systematic literature review was conducted to ascertain existing population and program-level colposcopy quality indicators. A systems-level cervical cancer screening pathway describing each step from an abnormal screening test, to colposcopy, and back to screening was developed. Indicators from the literature were assigned a place on the pathway to ensure that all steps were measured. A prioritization matrix scoring system was used to score each indicator based on predetermined criteria. Proposed colposcopy quality indicators were shared with provincial and territorial screening programs and subsequently revised. Results:The 10 population-based colposcopy quality indicators identified as priorities were colposcopy uptake, histologic investigation (biopsy) rate, colposcopy referral rate, failure to attend colposcopy, treatment frequency in women 18-24 years of age, re-treatment proportion, colposcopy exit-test proportion, histologic investigation (biopsy) frequency after low-grade Pap test results, length of colposcopy episode of care, and operating room treatment rate. Two descriptive indicators were also identified: colposcopist volume and number of colposcopists per capita. Summary:High-quality colposcopy services are an essential component of provincial cervical cancer screening programs. The proposed quality and descriptive indicators will permit colposcopy outcomes to be compared between provinces and across Canada so as to identify opportunities for improving colposcopy services.

SUBMITTER: Decker K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6588076 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measuring colposcopy quality in Canada: development of population-based indicators.

Decker K K Baines N N Muzyka C C Lee M M Mayrand M H MH Yang H H Fung S S Mercer D D McFaul S S Kupets R R Savoie R R Lotocki R R Bentley J J

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) 20190601 3

<h4>Background</h4>Colposcopy is a key part of cervical cancer control. As cervical cancer screening and prevention strategies evolve, monitoring colposcopy performance will become even more critical. In the present paper, we describe population-based colposcopy quality indicators that are recommended for ongoing measurement by cervical cancer screening programs in Canada.<h4>Methods</h4>The Pan-Canadian Cervical Cancer Screening Network established a multidisciplinary expert working group to id ...[more]

PMID: 31285670

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundColposcopy, the key step in the management of women with abnormal Pap smear results, is a visual technique prone to observer variation, which implies the need for prolonged apprenticeship, continuous training, and quality assurance (QA) measures. Colposcopy QA programmes vary in level of responsibility of organizing subjects, geographic coverage, scope, model, and type of actions. The programmes addressing the clinical standards of colposcopy (quality of examination and appropriateness of clinical decisions) are more limited in space and less sustainable over time than those focused on the provision of the service (resources, accessibility, etc.). This article reports on the protocol of a QA programme targeting the clinical quality of colposcopy in a population-based cervical screening service in an administrative region of northern Italy.Methods/designAfter a situation analysis of local colposcopy audit practices and previous QA initiatives, a permanent web-based QA programme was developed. The design places more emphasis on providing education and feedback to participants than on testing them. The technical core is a log-in web application accessible on the website of the regional Administration. The primary objectives are to provide (1) a practical opportunity for retraining of screening colposcopists, and (2) a platform for them to interact with colposcopists from other settings and regions through exchange and discussion of digital colposcopic images. The retraining function is based on repeated QA sessions in which the registered colposcopists log-in, classify a posted set of colpophotographs, and receive on line a set of personal feedback data. Each session ends with a plenary seminar featuring the presentation of overall results and an interactive review of the test set of colpophotographs. This is meant to be a forum for an open exchange of views that may lead to more knowledge and more diagnostic homogeneity. The protocol includes the criteria for selection of colpophotographs and the rationale for colposcopic gold standards.DiscussionThis programme is an ongoing initiative open to further developments, in particular in the area of basic training. It uses the infrastructure of the internet to give a novel solution to technical problems affecting colposcopy QA in population-based screening services.

Project description:BackgroundThere are currently no global recommendations on a parsimonious and robust set of indicators that can be measured routinely or periodically to monitor quality of hospital care for children and young adolescents. We describe a systematic methodology used to prioritize and define a core set of such indicators and their metadata for progress tracking, accountability, learning and improvement, at facility, (sub) national, national, and global levels.MethodsWe used a deductive methodology which involved the use of the World Health Organization Standards for improving the quality-of-care for children and young adolescents in health facilities as the organizing framework for indicator development. The entire process involved 9 complementary steps which included: a rapid literature review of available evidence, the application of a peer-reviewed systematic algorithm for indicator systematization and prioritization, and multiple iterative expert consultations to establish consensus on the proposed indicators and their metadata.ResultsWe derived a robust set of 25 core indicators and their metadata, representing all 8 World Health Organization quality standards, 40 quality statements and 520 quality measures. Most of these indicators are process-related (64%) and 20% are outcome/impact indicators. A large proportion (84%) of indicators were proposed for measurement at both outpatient and inpatient levels. By virtue of being a parsimonious set and given the stringent criteria for prioritizing indicators with "quality measurement" attributes, the recommended set is not evenly distributed across the 8 quality standards.ConclusionsTo support ongoing global and national initiatives around paediatric quality-of-care programming at country level, the recommended indicators can be adopted using a tiered approach that considers indicator measurability in the short-, medium-, and long-terms, within the context of the country's health information system readiness and maturity. However, there is a need for further research to assess the feasibility of implementing these indicators across contexts, and the need for their validation for global common reporting.

Project description:BackgroundQuality indicators are important tools to measure and ultimately improve the quality of care provided. Performance measurement may be particularly helpful to grow disciplines that are underutilized and cost-effective, such as home dialysis (peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis).ObjectiveTo identify and catalog home dialysis quality indicators currently used in Canada, as well as to evaluate these indicators as a starting point for future collaboration and standardization of quality indicators across Canada.DesignAn environmental scan of quality indicators from provincial organizations, quality organizations, and stakeholders.SettingSixteen-member pan-Canadian panel with expertise in both nephrology and quality improvement.PatientsOur environmental scan included indicators relevant to patients on home dialysis.MeasurementsWe classified existing indicators based on the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and Donabedian frameworks.MethodsTo evaluate the indicators, a 6-person subcommittee conducted a modified version of the Delphi consensus technique based on the American College of Physicians/Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality criteria. We shared these consensus ratings with the entire 16-member panel for further examination. We rated items from 1 to 9 on 6 domains (1-3 does not meet criteria to 7-9 meets criteria) as well as a global final rating (1-3 unnecessary to 7-9 necessary) to distinguish high-quality from low-quality indicators.ResultsOverall, we identified 40 quality indicators across 7 provinces, with 22 (55%) rated as "necessary" to distinguish high quality from poor quality care. Ten indicators were measured by more than 1 province, and 5 of these indicators were rated as necessary (home dialysis prevalence, home dialysis incidence, anemia target achievement, rates of peritonitis associated with peritoneal dialysis, and home dialysis attrition). None of these indicators captured the IOM domains of timely, patient-centered, or equitable care.LimitationsThe environmental scan is a nonexhaustive list of quality indicators in Canada. The panel also lacked representation from patients, administrators, and allied health professionals.ConclusionsThese results provide Canadian home dialysis programs with a starting point on how to measure quality of care along with the current gaps. This work is an initial and necessary step toward future collaboration and standardization of quality indicators across Canada, so that home dialysis programs can access a smaller number of highly rated balanced indicators to motivate and support patient-centered quality improvement initiatives.

Project description:ObjectivesEvidence-based clinical guidelines play an important role in healthcare and can be a valuable source for quality indicators (QIs). However, the link between guidelines and QI is often neglected and methodological standards for the development of guideline-based QI are still lacking. The aim of this qualitative study was to get insights into experiences of international authors with developing and implementing guideline-based QI.SettingWe conducted semistructured interviews via phone or skype (September 2017-February 2018) with guideline authors developing guideline-based QI.Participants15 interview participants from eight organisations in six European and North American countries.MethodsOrganisations were selected using purposive sampling with a maximum variation of healthcare settings. From each organisation a clinician and a methodologist were asked to participate. An interview guide was developed based on the QI development steps according to the 'Reporting standards for guideline-based performance measures' by the Guidelines International Network. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis with deductive and inductive categories.ResultsInterviewees deemed a programmatic approach, involvement of representative stakeholders with clinical and methodological knowledge and the connection to existing quality improvement strategies important factors for developing QI parallel to or after guideline development. Methodological training of the developing team and a shared understanding of the QI purpose were further seen conducive. Patient participation and direct patient relevance were inconsistently considered important, whereas a strong evidence base was seen essential. To assess measurement characteristics interviewees favoured piloting, but often missed implementation. Lack of measurability is still experienced a serious limitation, especially for qualitative aspects and individualised care.ConclusionOur results suggest that developing guideline-based QI can succeed either parallel to or following the guideline process with careful planning and instruction. Strategic partnerships seem key for implementation. Patient participation and relevance, measurement of qualitative aspects and piloting are areas for further development.Trial registration numberGerman Clinical Trials Registry (DRKS00013006).

Dataset Information

Measuring colposcopy quality in Canada: development of population-based indicators.

Publications

Measuring colposcopy quality in Canada: development of population-based indicators.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets