Search results for: Cino Bendinelli

Authors: Liane J. Ioannou, Jonathan Serpell, Joanne Dean, Cino Bendinelli, Jenny Gough, Dean Lisewski, Julie Miller, Win Meyer-Rochow, Stan Sidhu, Duncan Topliss, David Walters, John Zalcberg, Susannah Ahern

Abstract:

Background: The occurrence of thyroid cancer is increasing throughout the developed world, including Australia and New Zealand, and since the 1990s has become the fastest increasing malignancy. Following the success of a number of institutional databases that monitor outcomes after thyroid surgery, the Australian and New Zealand Endocrine Surgeons (ANZES) agreed to auspice the development of a bi-national thyroid cancer registry. Objectives: To establish a bi-national population-based clinical quality registry with the aim of monitoring and improving the quality of care provided to patients diagnosed with thyroid cancer in Australia and New Zealand. Patients and Methods: The Australian and New Zealand Thyroid Cancer Registry (ANZTCR) captures clinical data for all patients, over the age of 18 years, diagnosed with thyroid cancer, confirmed by histopathology report, that have been diagnosed, assessed or treated at a contributing hospital. Data is collected by endocrine surgeons using a web-based interface, REDCap, primarily via direct data entry. Results: A multi-disciplinary Steering Committee was formed, and with operational support from Monash University the ANZTCR was established in early 2017. The pilot phase of the registry is currently operating in Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia, with over 30 sites expected to come on board across Australia and New Zealand in 2018. A modified-Delphi process was undertaken to determine the key quality indicators to be reported by the registry, and a minimum dataset was developed comprising information regarding thyroid cancer diagnosis, pathology, surgery, and 30-day follow up. Conclusion: There are very few established thyroid cancer registries internationally, yet clinical quality registries have shown valuable outcomes and patient benefits in other cancers. The establishment of the ANZTCR provides the opportunity for Australia and New Zealand to further understand the current practice in the treatment of thyroid cancer and reasons for variation in outcomes. The engagement of endocrine surgeons in supporting this initiative is crucial. While the pilot registry has a focus on early clinical outcomes, it is anticipated that future collection of longer-term outcome data particularly for patients with the poor prognostic disease will add significant further value to the registry.

Keywords: thyroid cancer, clinical registry, population health, quality improvement

Procedia PDF Downloads 165

Authors: Liane J. Ioannou, Jonathan Serpell, Cino Bendinelli, David Walters, Jenny Gough, Dean Lisewski, Win Meyer-Rochow, Julie Miller, Duncan Topliss, Bill Fleming, Stephen Farrell, Andrew Kiu, James Kollias, Mark Sywak, Adam Aniss, Linda Fenton, Danielle Ghusn, Simon Harper, Aleksandra Popadich, Kate Stringer, David Watters, Susannah Ahern

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: There are significant variations in the management, treatment and outcomes of thyroid cancer, particularly in the role of: diagnostic investigation and pre-treatment scanning; optimal extent of surgery (total or hemi-thyroidectomy); use of active surveillance for small low-risk cancers; central lymph node dissections (therapeutic or prophylactic); outcomes following surgery (e.g. recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, hypocalcaemia, hypoparathyroidism); post-surgical hormone, calcium and vitamin D therapy; and provision and dosage of radioactive iodine treatment. A proven strategy to reduce variations in the outcome and to improve survival is to measure and compare it using high-quality clinical registry data. Clinical registries provide the most effective means of collecting high-quality data and are a tool for quality improvement. Where they have been introduced at a state or national level, registries have become one of the most clinically valued tools for quality improvement. To benchmark clinical care, clinical quality registries require systematic measurement at predefined intervals and the capacity to report back information to participating clinical units. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a core set clinical indicators that enable measurement and reporting of quality of care for patients with thyroid cancer. We hypothesise that measuring clinical quality indicators, developed to identify differences in quality of care across sites, will reduce variation and improve patient outcomes and survival, thereby lessening costs and healthcare burden to the Australian community. METHOD: Preparatory work and scoping was conducted to identify existing high quality, clinical guidelines and best practice for thyroid cancer both nationally and internationally, as well as relevant literature. A bi-national panel was invited to participate in a modified Delphi process. Panelists were asked to rate each proposed indicator on a Likert scale of 1–9 in a three-round iterative process. RESULTS: A total of 236 potential quality indicators were identified. One hundred and ninety-two indicators were removed to reflect the data capture by the Australian and New Zealand Thyroid Cancer Registry (ANZTCR) (from diagnosis to 90-days post-surgery). The remaining 44 indicators were presented to the panelists for voting. A further 21 indicators were later added by the panelists bringing the total potential quality indicators to 65. Of these, 21 were considered the most important and feasible indicators to measure quality of care in thyroid cancer, of which 12 were recommended for inclusion in the final set. The consensus indicator set spans the spectrum of care, including: preoperative; surgery; surgical complications; staging and post-surgical treatment planning; and post-surgical treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a core set of quality indicators to measure quality of care in thyroid cancer. This indicator set can be applied as a tool for internal quality improvement, comparative quality reporting, public reporting and research. Inclusion of these quality indicators into monitoring databases such as clinical quality registries will enable opportunities for benchmarking and feedback on best practice care to clinicians involved in the management of thyroid cancer.

Keywords: clinical registry, Delphi survey, quality indicators, quality of care

Procedia PDF Downloads 143