Hematology/Oncology Fellowship Programs' Participation in the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative

Author:

Makhoul Issam1ORCID,Anders Michael1ORCID,Siegel Robert2ORCID,Chiang Anne3,Markham Merry-Jennifer4ORCID,Chen Ronald C.5,Mougalian Sarah3ORCID,Arnaoutakis Konstantinos1,Giuliani Meredith6ORCID,Im Annie7,Kozlik Mary May Priscilla8ORCID,Crist Stephanie T.S.8,Garrett-Mayer Elizabeth8ORCID,Kamal Arif9ORCID

Affiliation:

1. University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR

2. Bon Secours St Francis Cancer Center, Greenville, SC

3. Yale Cancer Center, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT

4. University of Florida College of Medicine, UF Health Cancer Center, Gainesville, FL

5. University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS

6. Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada

7. University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA

8. American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA

9. Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC

Abstract

PURPOSE: In the first decade of this millennium, ASCO pioneered a quality measurement tool, the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI). Despite an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirement since 2012 for oncology fellows to participate in quality improvement (QI) projects, the uptake of QOPI remains modest. METHODS: This study examined reasons for low QOPI participation by surveying participating and nonparticipating HemOnc Fellowship Programs. The survey elicited views toward QI and QOPI as well as ideas about making the program more helpful. RESULTS: Among 69 fellowship programs, only 39% (n = 27) participated in QOPI. Other findings were that (1) the majority of programs considered their fellows' QI projects beneficial but were not fulfilling the ACGME standard for all fellows' QI participation; (2) nonparticipating programs were unfamiliar with but interested in QOPI; (3) participating programs tended to view QI as easier to conduct and more beneficial than nonparticipating programs; and (4) programs that withdrew from QOPI and participating programs alike were dissatisfied with the educational benefit and data abstraction burden for fellows. CONCLUSION: Academic oncology programs generally valued QI but many have not fully engaged in it. Fellows in programs participating in QOPI may have had less difficulty conducting QI and their projects may have been more beneficial than that of nonparticipating programs. However, perceived lack of educational benefits for fellows and the burden of manual data abstraction from the electronic medical record are impediments to satisfaction with the program. Higher faculty involvement and longitudinal reports for each fellow may significantly increase participation.

Publisher

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Subject

Oncology (nursing),Health Policy,Oncology

Cited by 2 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

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3