Relationship Between Baseline Prostate-specific Antigen on Cancer Detection and Prostate Cancer Death: Long-term Follow-up from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The European Association of Urology guidelines recommend a risk-based strategy for prostate cancer screening based on the first prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and age. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of the first PSA level on prostate cancer (PCa) detection and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) in a population-based screening trial (repeat screening every 2-4 yr). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We evaluated 25589 men aged 55-59 yr, 16898 men aged 60-64 yr, and 12936 men aged 65-69 yr who attended at least one screening visit in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial (screening arm: repeat PSA testing every 2-4 yr and biopsy in cases with elevated PSA; control arm: no active screening offered) during 16-yr follow-up (FU). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We assessed the actuarial probability for any PCa and for clinically significant (cs)PCa (Gleason ≥7). Cox proportional-hazards regression was performed to assess whether the association between baseline PSA and PCSM was comparable for all age groups. A Lorenz curve was computed to assess the association between baseline PSA and PCSM for men aged 60-61 yr. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The overall actuarial probability at 16 yr ranged from 12% to 16% for any PCa and from 3.7% to 5.7% for csPCa across the age groups. The actuarial probability of csPCa at 16 yr ranged from 1.2-1.5% for men with PSA <1.0 ng/ml to 13.3-13.8% for men with PSA ≥3.0 ng/ml. The association between baseline PSA and PCSM differed marginally among the three age groups. A Lorenz curve for men aged 60-61 yr showed that 92% of lethal PCa cases occurred among those with PSA above the median (1.21 ng/ml). In addition, for men initially screened at age 60-61 yr with baseline PSA <2 ng/ml, further continuation of screening is unlikely to be beneficial after the age of 68-70 yr if PSA is still <2 ng/ml. No case of PCSM emerged in the subsequent 8 yr (up to age 76-78 yr). A limitation is that these results may not be generalizable to an opportunistic screening setting or to contemporary clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: In all age groups, baseline PSA can guide decisions on the repeat screening interval. Baseline PSA of <1.0 ng/ml for men aged 55-69 yr is a strong indicator to delay or stop further screening. PATIENT SUMMARY: In prostate cancer screening, the patient's baseline PSA (prostate-specific antigen) level can be used to guide decisions on when to repeat screening. The PSA test when used according to current knowledge is valuable in helping to reduce the burden of prostate cancer.

Intervention-related Deaths in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Identification of intervention-related deaths is important for an accurate assessment of the ratio of benefit to harm in screening trials. OBJECTIVE: To investigate intervention-related deaths by study arm in the European Randomized Study of Prostate Cancer Screening (ERSPC). DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: ERSPC is a multicenter trial initiated in the 1990s to investigate whether screening on the basis of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) can decrease prostate cancer mortality. The present study included men in the core age group (55-69 yr: screening group n = 112 553, control group n = 128 681) with 16-yr follow-up. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Causes of death among men with prostate cancer in ERSPC were predominantly evaluated by independent national committees via review of medical records according to a predefined algorithm. Intervention-related deaths were defined as deaths caused by complications during the screening procedure, treatment, or follow-up. Descriptive statistics were used for the results. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 34 deaths were determined to be intervention-related, of which 21 were in the screening arm and 13 in the control arm. The overall risk of intervention-related death was 1.41 (95% confidence interval 0.99-1.99) per 10 000 randomized men for both arms combined and varied among centers from 0 to 7.0 per 10 000 randomized men. A limitation of this study is that differences in procedures among centers decreased the comparability of the results. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention-related deaths were rare in ERSPC. Monitoring of intervention-related deaths in screening trials is important for assessment of harms. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated deaths due to screening or treatment to assess harm in a trial of prostate cancer screening. Few such deaths were identified.

A 16-yr Follow-up of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has previously demonstrated that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening decreases prostate cancer (PCa) mortality. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether PSA screening decreases PCa mortality for up to 16yr and to assess results following adjustment for nonparticipation and the number of screening rounds attended. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicentre population-based randomised screening trial was conducted in eight European countries. Report includes 182160 men, followed up until 2014 (maximum of 16yr), with a predefined core age group of 162389 men (55-69yr), selected from population registry. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The outcome was PCa mortality, also assessed with adjustment for nonparticipation and the number of screening rounds attended. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The rate ratio of PCa mortality was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.89, p<0.001) at 16yr. The difference in absolute PCa mortality increased from 0.14% at 13yr to 0.18% at 16yr. The number of men needed to be invited for screening to prevent one PCa death was 570 at 16yr compared with 742 at 13yr. The number needed to diagnose was reduced to 18 from 26 at 13yr. Men with PCa detected during the first round had a higher prevalence of PSA >20ng/ml (9.9% compared with 4.1% in the second round, p<0.001) and higher PCa mortality (hazard ratio=1.86, p<0.001) than those detected subsequently. CONCLUSIONS: Findings corroborate earlier results that PSA screening significantly reduces PCa mortality, showing larger absolute benefit with longer follow-up and a reduction in excess incidence. Repeated screening may be important to reduce PCa mortality on a population level. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the outcomes from prostate cancer in a large European population. We found that repeated screening reduces the risk of dying from prostate cancer.

Cribado del cáncer de próstata con antígeno específico prostático en varones mayores de 75 años / Prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer in males older than 75 years

No disponible

The efficacy of prostate-specific antigen screening: Impact of key components in the ERSPC and PLCO trials.

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) demonstrated that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening significantly reduced prostate cancer mortality (rate ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.91). The US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) trial indicated no such reduction but had a wide 95% CI (rate ratio for prostate cancer mortality, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.87-1.36). Standard meta-analyses are unable to account for key differences between the trials that can impact the estimated effects of screening and the trials' point estimates. METHODS: The authors calibrated 2 microsimulation models to individual-level incidence and mortality data from 238,936 men participating in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. A cure parameter for the underlying efficacy of screening was estimated by the models separately for each trial. The authors changed step-by-step major known differences in trial settings, including enrollment and attendance patterns, screening intervals, PSA thresholds, biopsy receipt, control arm contamination, and primary treatment, to reflect a more ideal protocol situation and differences between the trials. RESULTS: Using the cure parameter estimated for the ERSPC, the models projected 19% to 21% and 6% to 8%, respectively, prostate cancer mortality reductions in the ERSPC and PLCO settings. Using this cure parameter, the models projected a reduction of 37% to 43% under annual screening with 100% attendance and biopsy compliance and no contamination. The cure parameter estimated for the PLCO trial was 0. CONCLUSIONS: The observed cancer mortality reduction in screening trials appears to be highly sensitive to trial protocol and practice settings. Accounting for these differences, the efficacy of PSA screening in the PLCO setting is not necessarily inconsistent with ERSPC results. Cancer 2018;124:1197-206. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Reconciling the Effects of Screening on Prostate Cancer Mortality in the ERSPC and PLCO Trials.

BACKGROUND: The ERSPC (European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer) found that screening reduced prostate cancer mortality, but the PLCO (Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial) found no reduction. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether effects of screening on prostate cancer mortality relative to no screening differed between the ERSPC and PLCO. DESIGN: Cox regression of prostate cancer death in each trial group, adjusted for age and trial. Extended analyses accounted for increased incidence due to screening and diagnostic work-up in each group via mean lead times (MLTs), which were estimated empirically and using analytic or microsimulation models. SETTING: Randomized controlled trials in Europe and the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Men aged 55 to 69 (ERSPC) or 55 to 74 (PLCO) years at randomization. INTERVENTION: Prostate cancer screening. MEASUREMENTS: Prostate cancer incidence and survival from randomization; prostate cancer incidence in the United States before screening began. RESULTS: Estimated MLTs were similar in the ERSPC and PLCO intervention groups but were longer in the PLCO control group than the ERSPC control group. Extended analyses found no evidence that effects of screening differed between trials (P = 0.37 to 0.47 [range across MLT estimation approaches]) but strong evidence that benefit increased with MLT (P = 0.0027 to 0.0032). Screening was estimated to confer a 7% to 9% reduction in the risk for prostate cancer death per year of MLT. This translated into estimates of 25% to 31% and 27% to 32% lower risk for prostate cancer death with screening as performed in the ERSPC and PLCO intervention groups, respectively, compared with no screening. LIMITATION: The MLT is a simple metric of screening and diagnostic work-up. CONCLUSION: After differences in implementation and settings are accounted for, the ERSPC and PLCO provide compatible evidence that screening reduces prostate cancer mortality. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.

Absolute Effect of Prostate Cancer Screening: Balance of Benefits and Harms by Center within the European Randomized Study of Prostate Cancer Screening.

PURPOSE: The balance of benefits and harms in prostate cancer screening has not been sufficiently characterized. We related indicators of mortality reduction and overdetection by center within the European Randomized Study of Prostate Cancer Screening (ERSPC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We analyzed the absolute mortality reduction expressed as number needed to invite (NNI = 1/absolute risk reduction; indicating how many men had to be randomized to screening arm to avert a prostate cancer death) for screening and the absolute excess of prostate cancer detection as number needed for overdetection (NNO = 1/absolute excess incidence; indicating the number of men invited per additional prostate cancer case), and compared their relationship across the seven ERSPC centers. RESULTS: Both absolute mortality reduction (NNI) and absolute overdetection (NNO) varied widely between the centers: NNI, 200-7,000 and NNO, 16-69. Extent of overdiagnosis and mortality reduction was closely associated [correlation coefficient, r = 0.76; weighted linear regression coefficient, ß = 33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 5-62; R(2) = 0.72]. For an averted prostate cancer death at 13 years of follow-up, 12 to 36 excess cases had to be detected in various centers. CONCLUSIONS: The differences between the ERSPC centers likely reflect variations in prostate cancer incidence and mortality, as well as in screening protocol and performance. The strong interrelation between the benefits and harms suggests that efforts to maximize the mortality effect are bound to increase overdiagnosis and might be improved by focusing on high-risk populations. The optimal balance between screening intensity and risk of overdiagnosis remains unclear.

Metastatic Prostate Cancer Incidence and Prostate-specific Antigen Testing: New Insights from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has shown a 21% reduction in prostate cancer (PCa) mortality and a 1.6-fold increase in PCa incidence with prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening (at 13 yr of follow-up). We evaluated PCa incidence by risk category at diagnosis across the study arms to assess the potential impact on PCa mortality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Information on arm, centre, T and M stage, Gleason score, serum PSA at diagnosis, age at randomisation, follow-up time, and vital status were extracted from the ERSPC database. Four risk categories at diagnosis were defined: 1, low; 2, intermediate; 3, high; 4, metastatic disease. PSA (≤100 or >100 ng/ml) was used as the indicator of metastasis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for screening versus control arm by risk category at diagnosis and follow-up time were calculated using Poisson regression analysis for seven centres. Follow-up was truncated at 13 yr. Missing data were imputed using chained equations. The analyses were carried out on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In the screening arm, 7408 PCa cases were diagnosed and 6107 in the control arm. The proportion of missing stage, Gleason score, or PSA value was comparable in the two arms (8% vs 10%), but differed among centres. The IRRs were elevated in the screening arm for the low-risk (IRR: 2.14; 95% CI, 2.03-2.25) and intermediate-risk (IRR: 1.24; 95% CI, 1.16-1.34) categories at diagnosis, equal to unity for the high-risk category at diagnosis (IRR: 1.00; 95% CI, 0.89-1.13), and reduced for metastatic disease at diagnosis (IRR: 0.60; 95% CI, 0.52-0.70). The IRR of metastatic disease had temporal pattern similar to mortality, shifted forwards an average of almost 3 yr, although the mortality reduction was smaller. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm a reduction in metastatic disease at diagnosis in the screening arm, preceding mortality reduction by almost 3 yr. PATIENT SUMMARY: The findings of this study indicate that the decrease in metastatic disease at diagnosis is the major determinant of the prostate cancer mortality reduction in the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

[What does Process Management add in a Urology Department?]. / ?Qué aporta la gestión por procesos en un Servicio de Urología?

The search for quality starts with the identification of client's needs and expectations, as the essential foundation of any organization. In this search process, we identify improvement areas that enable specific actions that finish the closest to total client's and other interested agents' satisfaction (Workers, shareholders, suppliers, etc). This approach is equally valid in the health care environment. Development of a quality improvement plan based on process management is a resource of important value for the search of excellence in a clinical unit. Great part of this monographic issue is dedicated to show the experience recorded in a Urological unit.

[Evaluation of the maturity of a Urology Department in terms of Quality. Management and Quality improvement operative objectives]. / Evaluación de la madurez de un Servicio de Urología en términos de calidad. Objetivos operativos de gestión y mejora de la calidad.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of quality management is the identification of improvement areas to achieve total client and other involved agents satisfaction. In this paper we describe the start up of a Quality Improvement Plan (QIP) in a Urology Department. METHODS: We assessed the current maturity and performance of the Unit by means of self-evaluation with a questionnaire adapted to the 2009 ISO 9004 standard by all the professionals in the unit (Physicians and Nurses). All the items in the questionnaire are based in attributes and evaluation lines gathered in the five chapters of the Standard. The areas of improvement were identified and specific objectives were established and collected in the QIP with indicators for their measurement, responsible individuals, chronogram and results evaluation. After implementation of the quality improvement actions, a second self-evaluation was performed to start a new cycle. RESULTS: After the first evaluation we observed a high global performance (61%). Analyzed by sections, the highest level was achieved in the human resources management chapter (73%) and the lowest in quality management (30%) due to the absence of a process management approach. After identification of improvement areas, we defined projects and activities to be developed, in the process management context. The second evaluation, after the implementation of process management in the unit, showed an improvement in the maturity level of the Unit, reaching an 83%. CONCLUSIONS: The management of a clinical department cannot be limited to continuous improvisation. A process management approach is necessary, finishing with the usual defects of the generated product (variability, errors, omissions, waiting lists). Excellence in the quality of health care is an essential objective in every healthcare organization and standardization models, such as 2009 ISO 9004 standard, are the right way for that purpose.

[Architecture and design of a processes map in a Urology Department]. / Arquitectura y diseño de un mapa de procesos en un Servicio de Urología.

Every organization with the intention to be oriented to processes management must know it is a system and what are the factors that characterize it. Health care institutions are open and mixed systems. It is in this system where the chain of value of the productive process occurs, generating a very complex integrated management system, as the productive system main recipients are people with health needs. The process management approach in clinical centers, departments and units means that, once the processes have been identified, they have to be set depending on their mission, establishing a boxes and connections architecture known as process maps. Therefore, a map of processes is the graphical representation of the organizational management system, which may be deployed applying modeling techniques at various levels. In this article we will review the conceptual framework of the health care productive system and management with the focus on processes, incorporating didactic products based on experiences from various centers and health services.

[Definition and stabilization of processes I. Management processes and support in a Urology Department]. / Definición y estabilización de los procesos I. Procesos de gestión y soporte en un Servicio de Urología.

The implantation of total quality management models in clinical departments can better adapt to the 2009 ISO 9004 model. An essential part of implantation of these models is the establishment of processes and their stabilization. There are four types of processes: key, management, support and operative (clinical). Management processes have four parts: process stabilization form, process procedures form, medical activities cost estimation form and, process flow chart. In this paper we will detail the creation of an essential process in a surgical department, such as the process of management of the surgery waiting list.

[Definition and stabilization of processes II. Clinical Processes in a Urology Department]. / Definición y estabilización de los procesos II. Procesos clínicos en un Servicio de Urología.

New models in clinical management seek a clinical practice based on quality, efficacy and efficiency, avoiding variability and improvisation. In this paper we have developed one of the most frequent clinical processes in our speciality, the process based on DRG 311 or transurethral procedures without complications. Along it we will describe its components: Stabilization form, clinical trajectory, cost calculation, and finally the process flowchart.

[Inverse innovation models in the nurse clinic of a Urology Department]. / Modelo de innovación inversa en la consulta de enfermería de Servicios de Urología.

OBJECTIVES: In the urology clinics there is an important volume of limited-complexity pathology that consumes an important part of resources. Delegating some tasks of this type to Nurses may imply a competitive advantage in economic terms without decrease in the quality of the care given to patients and their level of satisfaction. This is an example of the concept of inverse innovation. In this work we try to make public our experience in the management by nursing staff of features of the urology consultation traditionally reserved to physicians, as well as the design of the related processes. METHODS: We developed the most frequent processes competence of the nursing staff in the unit: 1) Care of ambulatory urological surgery pathology; 2) Urologic ultrasound; 3) Traditional urologic nurse consultation. RESULTS: During 2013 the nursing staff performed 423 ambulatory urologic surgery pathology clinic visits, 931 urologic ultrasounds and 1019 varied actions corresponding to traditional urological nurse work.We developed stabilization formularies and flow diagrams of the aforementioned processes. We performed a quantification of the amount of money saved in comparison with the costs generated if a nurse or a physician was employed. Such saving was 2,78 and 4,00 Euros in the ambulatory urological surgery pathology and urologic ultrasound, respectively. Total savings in both processes was 4900 Euros. CONCLUSIONS: Implication of urological nursing staff in certain care tasks traditionally reserved to the physician is possible without increase in quality defects, obtaining an advantage in terms of economic cost and flexibility in staff organization thanks to the expansion of the competence array.

¿Qué aporta la gestión por procesos en un servicio de urología? / No disponible

La búsqueda de la calidad comienza con la identificación de las necesidades y expectativas de los clientes, como pilar fundamental de cualquier organización. En este proceso de búsqueda se identifican áreas de mejora que permitan actuaciones concretas que culminen lo más cerca posible de la satisfacción total de los clientes y otros agentes interesados (trabajadores, accionistas, proveedores, etc.). Este planteamiento es igualmente válido en el ámbito sanitario. El desarrollo de un plan de mejora de la calidad basado en la gestión por procesos es un medio de importante valor para la búsqueda de la excelencia en una unidad clínica. Buena parte de este número monográfico se ha dedicado a exponer la experiencia recopilada en este sentido en una unidad de Urología

The search for quality starts with the identification of client's needs and expectations, as the essential foundation of any organization. In this search process, we identify improvement areas that enable specific actions that finish the closest to total client`s and other interested agents` satisfaction (Workers, shareholders, suppliers, etc). This approach is equally valid in the health care environment. Development of a quality improvement plan based on process management is a resource of important value for the search of excellence in a clinical unit. Great part of this monographic issue is dedicated to show the experience recorded in a Urological unit

Evaluación de la madurez de un Servicio de Urología en términos de calidad. Objetivos operativos de gestión y mejora de la calidad / Evaluation of the maturity of a Urology Department in terms of Quality. Management and Quality improvement operative objectives

OBJETIVO: El objetivo de la gestión de la calidad es la identificación de áreas de mejora para conseguir la satisfacción total de los clientes y otros agentes interesados. En este artículo se describe la puesta en marcha de un Plan de Mejora de la Calidad (PMC) en un Servicio de Urología. étodos: Se determinó el nivel actual de madurez y desempeño de la Unidad mediante autoevaluación con cuestionario adaptado según la Norma Internacional ISO 9004 de 2009, por todos los profesionales de la unidad (personal facultativo y de enfermería). Todos los items del cuestionario están basados en atributos y líneas de valoración que se recogen en los cinco capítulos de la Norma. Se identificaron áreas de mejora y se trazaron objetivos concretos plasmados en un PMC donde se detallaron indicadores para su medida, responsables, procedimientos, cronograma, y evaluación de resultados. Tras la implantación de las acciones de mejora de la calidad, se llevó a cabo una segunda autoevaluación para iniciar un nuevo ciclo. RESULTADOS: Tras la primera autoevaluación,se observó un nivel global de desempeño alto (61%). Por apartados, el nivel más destacado se alcanzó en el capítulo de gestión de recursos (73%) y el más bajo en el de la gestión de la calidad (30%), debido a la ausencia de un enfoque de gestión por procesos. Tras la identificación de áreas de mejora se definieron proyectos y actividades a desarrollar, en el contexto de la gestión por procesos. La segunda autoevaluación, tras la implantación de la gestión por procesos en la unidad, mostró una mejora en nivel de madurez de la unidad, que alcanzó el 83%. CONCLUSIONES: La gestión de un servicio clínico no puede limitarse a la improvisación continua. Es necesario un abordaje de gestión por procesos que ponga fin a los defectos habituales del producto generado (variabilidad, errores, omisiones, listas de espera, etc.) La excelencia en la calidad de la atención es un objetivo fundamental de toda organización sanitaria y los modelos de estandarización de la calidad, como la Norma ISO 9004:2009 suponen el camino adecuado para tal fin

OBJECTIVES: The objective of quality management is the identification of improvement areas to achieve total client and other involved agents satisfaction. In this paper we describe the start up of a Quality Improvement Plan (QIP) in a Urology Department. METHODS: We assessed the current maturity and performance of the Unit by means of self-evaluation with a questionnaire adapted to the 2009 ISO 9004 standard by all the professionals in the unit (Physicians and Nurses). All the items in the questionnaire are based in attributes and evaluation lines gathered in the five chapters of the Standard. The areas of improvement were identified and specific objectives were established and collected in the QIP with indicators for their measurement, responsible individuals, chronogram and results evaluation. After implementation of the quality improvement actions, a second self-evaluation was performed to start a new cycle. RESULTS: After the first evaluation we observed a high global performance (61%). Analyzed by sections, the highest level was achieved in the human resources management chapter (73%) and the lowest in quality management (30%) due to the absence of a process management approach. After identification of improvement areas, we defined projects and activities to be developed, in the process management context. The second evaluation, after the implementation of process management in the unit, showed an improvement in the maturity level of the Unit, reaching an 83%. CONCLUSIONS: The management of a clinical department cannot be limited to continuous improvisation. A process management approach is necessary, finishing with the usual defects of the generated product (variability, errors, omissions, waiting lists). Excellence in the quality of health care is an essential objective in every healthcare organization and standardization models, such as 2009 ISO 9004 standard, are the right way for that purpose

Arquitectura y diseño de un mapa de procesos en un Servicio de Urología / Architecture and design of a processes map in a Urology Department

Una organización que pretenda orientarse a la gestión por procesos ha de saber qué es un sistema y cuáles son los factores que le caracterizan. Las instituciones sanitarias son sistemas abiertos y mixtos. Es en este sistema donde se produce la cadena de valor del proceso productivo, originando un sistema integrado de gestión muy complejo, dado que los destinatarios principales del sistema productivo son personas con necesidades de salud. El enfoque de la gestión por procesos en los centros, servicios y unidades clínicas supone que, una vez que se hayan identificado los procesos, hay que situarlos según su misión estableciéndose una arquitectura de cajas y conexiones que se conoce como mapas de procesos. Un mapa de proceso es, por lo tanto, la representación gráfica del sistema de gestión de la organización, el cual puede desplegarse aplicando técnicas de modelación en diversos niveles. En este artículo revisaremos el marco conceptual del sistema de producción y gestión sanitaria con enfoque de procesos, incorporando productos didácticos que están basados en experiencias llevadas a cabo en diferentes centros y servicios sanitarios

Every organization with the intention to be oriented to processes management must know it is a system and what are the factors that characterize it. Health care institutions are open and mixed systems. It is in this system where the chain of value of the productive process occurs, generating a very complex integrated management system, as the productive system main recipients are people with health needs. The process management approach in clinical centers, departments and units means that, once the processes have been identified, they have to be set depending on their mission, establishing a boxes and connections architecture known as process maps. Therefore, a map of processes is the graphical representation of the organizational management system, which may be deployed applying modeling techniques at various levels

Definición y estabilización de los procesos I. Procesos de gestión y soporte en un Servicio de Urología / Definition and stabilization of processes I. Management processes and support in a Urology Department

La implantación de modelos de gestión de calidad total en servicios clínicos se adapta mejor al modelo ISO 9004:2009. Una parte esencial en la implantación de estos modelos de gestión es la creación de procesos y su estabilización. Existen cuatro tipos de procesos: claves, gestión, soporte y operativos (clínicos). Los procesos de gestión constan de cuatro partes: el formulario de estabilización del proceso, el formulario de procedimientos del proceso, el formulario de estimación de coste de actividades médicas y el diagrama de flujo del proceso. En este trabajo vamos a detallar la creación de un proceso esencial dentro de un servicio quirúrgico, como es el proceso de gestión de la lista de espera quirúrgica

The implantation of total quality management models in clinical departments can better adapt to the 2009 ISO 9004 model. An essential part of implantation of these models is the establishment of processes and their stabilization. There are four types of processes: key, management, support and operative (clinical). Management processes have four parts: process stabilization form, process procedures form, medical activities cost estimation form and, process flow chart. In this paper we will detail the creation of an essential process in a surgical department, such as the process of management of the surgery waiting list

Definición y estabilización de los procesos II. Procesos clínicos en un Servicio de Urología / Definition and stabilization of processes II. Management processes and support in a Urology Department

Los nuevos modelos de gestión clínica persiguen una práctica clínica basada en la calidad, la eficacia y la eficiencia evitando la variabilidad y la improvisación. En este trabajo, hemos desarrollado uno de los procesos clínicos más frecuentes en nuestra especialidad: el basado en el GRD 311 o procedimentos transuretrales sin complicaciones. A lo largo del mismo describiremos sus componentes: el formulario de estabilización, la trayectoría clínica, el cálculo de costes, y finalmente el diagrama de flujo del proceso

New models in clinical management seek a clinical practice based on quality, efficacy and efficiency, avoiding variability and improvisation. In this paper we have developed one of the most frequent clinical processes in our speciality, the process based on DRG 311 or transurethral procedures without complications. Along it we will describe its components: Stabilization form, clinical trajectory, cost calculation, and finally the process flowchart