Background: The shift toward value-based care in the United States emphasizes the role of quality measures in payment models. Many diseases, such as prostate cancer, have a proliferation of quality measures, resulting in resource burden and physician burnout. This study aimed to identify and summarize proposed prostate cancer quality measures and describe their frequency and use in peer-reviewed literature. Methods: The PubMed database was used to identify quality measures relevant to prostate cancer care, and included articles in English through April 2018. A gray literature search for other documents was also conducted. After the selection process of the pertinent articles, measure characteristics were abstracted, and uses were summarized for the 10 most frequently utilized measures in the literature. Results: A total of 26 articles were identified for review. Of the 71 proposed prostate cancer quality measures, only 47 were used, and less than 10% of these were endorsed by the National Quality Forum. Process measures were most frequently reported (84.5%). Only 6 outcome measures (8.5%) were proposed—none of which were among the most frequently utilized. Conclusion: Although a high number of proposed prostate cancer quality measures are reported in the literature, few were assessed, and the majority of these were non-endorsed process measures. Process measures were most commonly assessed; outcome measures were rarely evaluated. In a step to close the quality chasm, a “top 5” core set of quality measures for prostate cancer care, including structure, process, and outcomes measures, is suggested. Future studies should consider this comprehensive set of quality measures.

Utilization of Prostate Cancer Quality Metrics for Research and Quality Improvement: A Structured Review / Gori, Davide; Dulal, Rajendra; Blayney, Douglas W.; Brooks, James D.; Fantini, Maria P.; McDonald, Kathryn M.; Hernandez-Boussard, Tina. - In: JOINT COMMISSSION JOURNAL ON QUALITY AND SAFETY. - ISSN 1553-7250. - ELETTRONICO. - 45:3(2019), pp. 217-226. [10.1016/j.jcjq.2018.06.004]

Utilization of Prostate Cancer Quality Metrics for Research and Quality Improvement: A Structured Review

Gori, Davide;Fantini, Maria P.;
2019

Abstract

Background: The shift toward value-based care in the United States emphasizes the role of quality measures in payment models. Many diseases, such as prostate cancer, have a proliferation of quality measures, resulting in resource burden and physician burnout. This study aimed to identify and summarize proposed prostate cancer quality measures and describe their frequency and use in peer-reviewed literature. Methods: The PubMed database was used to identify quality measures relevant to prostate cancer care, and included articles in English through April 2018. A gray literature search for other documents was also conducted. After the selection process of the pertinent articles, measure characteristics were abstracted, and uses were summarized for the 10 most frequently utilized measures in the literature. Results: A total of 26 articles were identified for review. Of the 71 proposed prostate cancer quality measures, only 47 were used, and less than 10% of these were endorsed by the National Quality Forum. Process measures were most frequently reported (84.5%). Only 6 outcome measures (8.5%) were proposed—none of which were among the most frequently utilized. Conclusion: Although a high number of proposed prostate cancer quality measures are reported in the literature, few were assessed, and the majority of these were non-endorsed process measures. Process measures were most commonly assessed; outcome measures were rarely evaluated. In a step to close the quality chasm, a “top 5” core set of quality measures for prostate cancer care, including structure, process, and outcomes measures, is suggested. Future studies should consider this comprehensive set of quality measures.
2019
Utilization of Prostate Cancer Quality Metrics for Research and Quality Improvement: A Structured Review / Gori, Davide; Dulal, Rajendra; Blayney, Douglas W.; Brooks, James D.; Fantini, Maria P.; McDonald, Kathryn M.; Hernandez-Boussard, Tina. - In: JOINT COMMISSSION JOURNAL ON QUALITY AND SAFETY. - ISSN 1553-7250. - ELETTRONICO. - 45:3(2019), pp. 217-226. [10.1016/j.jcjq.2018.06.004]
Gori, Davide; Dulal, Rajendra; Blayney, Douglas W.; Brooks, James D.; Fantini, Maria P.; McDonald, Kathryn M.; Hernandez-Boussard, Tina
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/656542
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 4
  • Scopus 6
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 6
social impact