Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
The aim of the study was to benchmark and compare breast cancer care quality indicators (QIs) between Norway and the Netherlands using federated analytics preventing transfer of patient-level data.
Methods
Breast cancer patients (2017–2018) were retrieved from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Cancer Registry of Norway. Five European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists (EUSOMA) QIs were assessed: two on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), two on surgical approaches, and one on postoperative radiotherapy. The QI outcomes were calculated using ‘Vantage 6’ federated Propensity Score Stratification (PSS). Likelihood of receiving a treatment was expressed in odds ratios (OR).
Results
In total, 39,163 patients were included (32,786 from the Netherlands and 6377 from Norway). PSS scores were comparable to the crude outcomes of the QIs. The Netherlands scored higher on the QI ‘proportions of patients preoperatively examined with breast MRI’ [37% vs.17.5%; OR 2.8 (95% CI 2.7–2.9)], the ‘proportions of patients receiving primary systemic therapy examined with breast MRI’ [83.3% vs. 70.8%; OR 2.3 (95% CI 1.3–3.3)], and ‘proportion of patients receiving a single breast operation’ [95.2% vs. 91.5%; OR 1.8 (95% CI 1.4–2.2)]. Country scores for ‘immediate breast reconstruction’ and ‘postoperative radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery’ were comparable. The EUSOMA standard was achieved in both countries for 4/5 indicators.
Conclusion
Both countries achieved high scores on the QIs. Differences were observed in the use of MRI and proportion of patients receiving single surgery. The federated approach supports future possibilities on benchmark QIs without transfer of privacy-sensitive data.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference30 articles.
1. Momenimovahed Z, Salehiniya H (2019) Epidemiological characteristics of and risk factors for breast cancer in the world. Breast Cancer 11:151–164. https://doi.org/10.2147/BCTT.S176070
2. Biganzoli L, Marotti L, Hart CD, Cataliotti L, Cutuli B, Kühn T, Mansel RE, Ponti A, Poortmans P, Regitnig P, van der Hage JA, Wengström Y, Rosselli Del Turco M (2017) Quality indicators in breast cancer care: an update from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 86:59–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.08.017
3. Busse R, Klazinga N, Panteli D, Quentin W (2019) Improving healthcare quality in Europe: characteristics, effectiveness and implementation of different strategies. World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe, Geneva
4. Zhang Z, Kim HJ, Lonjon G, Zhu Y, AME Big-Data Clinical Trial Collaborative Group (2019) Balance diagnostics after propensity score matching. Ann Transl Med 7(1):16. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2018.12.10
5. van Veen EB (2018) Observational health research in Europe: understanding the general data protection regulation and underlying debate. Eur J Cancer 104:70–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2018.09.032
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献