Multicentre clinical radiotherapy audit in rectal cancer: results of the IROCA project
-
Published:2020-08-27
Issue:1
Volume:15
Page:
-
ISSN:1748-717X
-
Container-title:Radiation Oncology
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Radiat Oncol
Author:
Fundowicz MagdalenaORCID, Aguiar Artur, de Castro Carla Lopes, Torras Maria Glòria, Deantonio Letizia, Konstanty Ewelina, Kruszyna-Mochalska Marta, Macia Miquel, Canals Eugeni, Caro Monica, Pisani Carla, Zwierzchowska Dorota, Molero Jaume, Eraso Arantxa, Lencart Joana, Muñoz-Montplet Carles, Carvalho Luisa, Krengli Marco, Malicki Julian, Guedea Ferran
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
To perform a clinical audit to assess adherence to standard clinical practice for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients undergoing radiotherapy for rectal cancer treatment in four European countries.
Materials and methods
Multi-institutional, retrospective cohort study of 221 patients treated for rectal cancer in 2015 at six European cancer centres. Clinical indicators applicable to general radiotherapy processes were evaluated. All data were obtained from electronic medical records.
Results
The audits were performed in the year 2017. We found substantial inter-centre variability in adherence to standard clinical practices: 1) presentation of cases at departmental clinical sessions (range, 0–100%) or multidisciplinary tumour board (50–95%); 2) pretreatment MRI (61.5–100%) and thoracoabdominal CT (15.0–100%). Large inter-centre differences were observed in the mean interval between biopsy and first visit to the radiotherapy department (range, 21.6–58.6 days) and between the first visit and start of treatment (15.1–38.8 days). Treatment interruptions ≥ 1 day occurred in 43.9% (2.5–90%) of cases overall. Treatment compensation was performed in 2.1% of cases. Treatment was completed in the prescribed time in 55.7% of cases.
Conclusions
This multi-institutional clinical audit revealed that most centres adhered to standard clinical practices for most of the radiotherapy processes-related variables assessed. However, the audit revealed marked inter-centre variability for certain quality indicators, particularly inconsistent record keeping. Multiple targets for improvement and/or harmonisation were identified, confirming the value of routine clinical audits to detect potential deviations from standard clinical practice.
Funder
Varian Medical Systems
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging,Oncology
Reference30 articles.
1. Breugom AJ, Bastiaannet E, Boelens PG, Van Eycken E, Iversen LH, Martling A, et al. Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I–III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44:1338–43. 2. Glynne-Jones R, Wyrwicz L, Tiret E, Brown G, Rödel C, Cervantes A, et al. Rectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2018;29:iv263. 3. Malicki J, Bly R, Bulot M, Godet J-LL, Jahnen A, Krengli M, et al. Patient safety in external beam radiotherapy – Guidelines on risk assessment and analysis of adverse error-events and near misses: Introducing the ACCIRAD project. Radiother Oncol. 2014;112:194–8. 4. Qian X. IAEA Human Health Series No. 4, Comprehensive Clinical Audits of Diagnostic Radiology Practices: A Tool for Quality Improvement. Health Phys. 2011;100:552. 5. Cionini L, Gardani G, Gabriele P, Magri S, Morosini PL, Rosi A, et al. Quality indicators in radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2007;82:191–200.
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
|
|