Variation in Definitive Therapy for Localized Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Among National Comprehensive Cancer Network Institutions.

PURPOSE: This study determined practice patterns in the staging and treatment of patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) among National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) member institutions. Secondary aims were to determine trends in the use of definitive therapy, predictors of treatment type, and acute adverse events associated with primary modalities of treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Oncology Outcomes Database from 2007 to 2011 for US patients with stage I NSCLC were used. Main outcome measures included patterns of care, predictors of treatment, acute morbidity, and acute mortality. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of patients received surgery, 16% received definitive radiation therapy (RT), and 3% were not treated. Seventy-four percent of the RT patients received stereotactic body RT (SBRT), and the remainder received nonstereotactic RT (NSRT). Among participating NCCN member institutions, the number of surgeries-to-RT course ratios varied between 1.6 and 34.7 (P<.01), and the SBRT-to-NSRT ratio varied between 0 and 13 (P=.01). Significant variations were also observed in staging practices, with brain imaging 0.33 (0.25-0.43) times as likely and mediastinoscopy 31.26 (21.84-44.76) times more likely for surgical patients than for RT patients. Toxicity rates for surgical and for SBRT patients were similar, although the rates were double for NSRT patients. CONCLUSIONS: The variations in treatment observed among NCCN institutions reflects the lack of level I evidence directing the use of surgery or SBRT for stage I NSCLC. In this setting, research of patient and physician preferences may help to guide future decision making.

Appreciative Inquiry for quality improvement in primary care practices.

PURPOSE: To test the effect of an Appreciative Inquiry (AI) quality improvement strategy on clinical quality management and practice development outcomes. Appreciative inquiry enables the discovery of shared motivations, envisioning a transformed future, and learning around the implementation of a change process. METHODS: Thirty diverse primary care practices were randomly assigned to receive an AI-based intervention focused on a practice-chosen topic and on improving preventive service delivery (PSD) rates. Medical-record review assessed change in PSD rates. Ethnographic field notes and observational checklist analysis used editing and immersion/crystallization methods to identify factors affecting intervention implementation and practice development outcomes. RESULTS: The PSD rates did not change. Field note analysis suggested that the intervention elicited core motivations, facilitated development of a shared vision, defined change objectives, and fostered respectful interactions. Practices most likely to implement the intervention or develop new practice capacities exhibited 1 or more of the following: support from key leader(s), a sense of urgency for change, a mission focused on serving patients, health care system and practice flexibility, and a history of constructive practice change. CONCLUSIONS: An AI approach and enabling practice conditions can lead to intervention implementation and practice development by connecting individual and practice strengths and motivations to the change objective.

Measuring practice capacity for change: a tool for guiding quality improvement in primary care settings.

PURPOSE: Capacity for change, or the ability and willingness to undertake change, is an organizational characteristic with potential to foster quality management in health care. We report on the development and psychometric properties of a quantitative measure of capacity for change for use in primary care settings. METHODS: Following review of previous conceptual and empirical studies, we generated 117 items that assessed organizational structure, climate, and culture. Using information from direct observation and key informant interviews, a research team member rated these items for 15 primary care practices engaged in a quality improvement intervention. Distributional statistics, pairwise correlation analysis, Rasch modeling, and item content review guided item reduction and instrument finalization. Reliability and convergent validity were assessed. RESULTS: Ninety-two items were removed because of limited response distributions and redundancy or because of poor Rasch model fit. The final instrument comprising 25 items had excellent reliability (alpha = .94). A Rasch model-derived capacity for change score correlated well with an independently determined, qualitatively derived summary assessment of each practice's capacity for change (rhoS = 0.82), suggesting good convergent validity. CONCLUSION: We describe a new instrument for quantifying organizational capacity for change in primary care settings. The ability to quantify capacity for change may enable better recognition of practices likely to be successful in their change efforts and those first requiring capacity building prior to change interventions.

The association of how time is spent during outpatient visits and patient satisfaction: are there racial differences?

Both satisfaction with the physician and how time is spent in the patient-physician outpatient visit have been shown to differ between African-American and Caucasian patients. This study uses structural equation modeling to examine racial differences in the association between time use during the outpatient visit and patient satisfaction. This cross-sectional study employed direct observation of outpatient visits and surveys of 2,502 adult African-American and Caucasian outpatients visiting 138 primary care physicians in 84 family practices in Northeast Ohio. Patient satisfaction was measured using the Medical Outcome Study (MOS) nine-item Visit Rating Scale. Time use was assessed with the Davis Observation Code, which was used to classify every 20 seconds of a visit into 20 behavioral categories. No difference was found between African-American and Caucasian patients in the association between patient satisfaction with a physician and the time the physician spent chatting, planning treatment, providing health education, structuring the interaction, assessing health knowledge or answering patient questions. Patients were generally satisfied with their physicians, and no racial differences between Caucasians and African Americans were observed. Despite racial differences in how physicians spend time in the outpatient visit encounter, these differences are not associated with racial differences in patient satisfaction. Efforts to understand disparities in satisfaction should address areas other than how physicians allocate time in the physician-patient encounter.