Facilitating the appropriate use of e-health solutions.

In this issue, the lead article proposes that e-health technologies should be used more broadly and that patients should have greater access to their information through such technologies. The Canadian Medical Protective Association (CMPA) agrees with this statement and suggests that to facilitate the timely and appropriate adoption of new technologies among healthcare providers to enhance patient care, barriers in the existing regulatory, legislative and legal frameworks must be addressed. While much of the discussion to date on e-health has focused primarily on high-level issues regarding regulatory compliance, "privacy by design" and the e-health "panacea," CMPA suggests that there needs to be a refocus on achieving more concrete change and gains through consideration of the specific impact on the drivers of healthcare delivery. An integrated or holistic approach is required involving healthcare providers, regulators, legislators, stakeholders, ministries of health, privacy commissioners and the courts. To better leverage potential advantages, efficiencies and enhanced, safer care for our healthcare system, all parties must work together to develop an acceptable and flexible approach to the "appropriate use" of e-health technologies that will facilitate adoption by healthcare professionals in a manner that is consistent with the expectations of the profession and applicable standards of practice.

Integrated interdisciplinary care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease reduces emergency department visits, admissions and costs: a quality assurance study.

BACKGROUND: Dedicated programs for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can reduce hospitalizations and improve quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether health care utilization could be reduced by a newly developed integrated, interdisciplinary initiative that included a COPD nurse navigator who educates patients and families, transitions patients through various points of care and integrates services. METHODS: The present quality assurance, pre-post study included patients followed by a COPD nurse navigator from January 25, 2010 to November 5, 2011. Information regarding emergency department visits and hospitalizations, including lengths of stay, were obtained from hospital databases. Diagnoses were classified as respiratory or nonrespiratory, and used primary and secondary hospitalization diagnoses to identify acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD). Paired sign tests were performed. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 202 patients. Following nurse navigator intervention, significantly more patients experienced a decrease in the number of respiratory-cause emergency department visits (P<0.05), number of respiratory hospitalizations (P<0.001), total hospital days for respiratory admissions (P<0.001), number of hospitalizations with AECOPD (P<0.001) and total hospital days for admissions with AECOPD (P<0.001). Financial modelling estimated annual savings in excess of $260,000. CONCLUSION: The present quality assurance study indicated that the implementation of an integrated interdisciplinary program for the care of patients with COPD can improve patient outcomes despite the tendency of COPD to worsen over time.

Early results after regionalization of thoracic surgical practice in a single-payer system.

BACKGROUND: Regionalization of the practice of thoracic surgery into designated centers was carried out in Ontario to manage volume, improve outcomes, and facilitate comprehensive care. This article describes the process used by Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) to regionalize thoracic surgery practice and reports early results. METHODS: A thoracic surgery standard was created by CCO, specifying criteria for level I (tertiary) and level II (secondary) thoracic surgery centers based on current volumes and projected population growth and referral patterns, and then implemented the standard using various incentives and disincentives. RESULTS: Before regionalization (2004), 46 hospitals performed thoracic surgical procedures compared with 13 level I and 2 level II centers in 2010. From 2007 to 2011, a mean $8.4 million was distributed annually to designated centers to fund a mean 625 additional thoracic operations annually. By 2009 to 2010, the number of esophagectomies performed at designated centers increased from 212 to 285 (89% being performed in designated centers). Correspondingly, the number of lung resections increased from 1,396 to 1,858 (94% being performed in designated centers). Median wait time for lung cancer resection did not change. Regionalization achieved a significant reduction in 30-day mortality after pneumonectomy (10.9%-5.6%; p = 0.03) but no change for esophagectomy (5.9%-5.8%; p = 0. 96) or lobectomy (2.2%-1.9%; p = 0. 37). CONCLUSIONS: Regionalization was challenging but feasible and was associated with reduced 30-day mortality after pneumonectomy. More data are required to evaluate other short- and long-term outcome measures to further validate benefits from regionalization.

Regional collaborations as a tool for quality improvements in surgery: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: A systematic review of the literature identifying regional collaborations in surgical practice examining practices related to quality improvement. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, were searched for published reports of regional collaborations in the surgical community relating to initiatives to enhance quality improvement, quality of care, patient safety, knowledge transfer, or communities of practice. RESULTS: Seven collaborative initiatives met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review of the evidence. Motivations for initiating collaborations were often in response to external demands for performance data. Changes in the processes of clinical care and improvements in clinical outcomes were reported on the basis of the collaborative efforts. Significant improvements in clinical outcomes such as decreases in mortality rates, lower duration of postoperative intubations, and fewer surgical-site infections were reported. Quality improvement process measures were also reported to be improved across all of the collaborative initiatives. Success factors included (a) the establishment of trust among health professionals and health institutions; (b) the availability of accurate, complete, relevant data; (c) clinical leadership; (d) institutional commitment; and (e) the infrastructure and methodological support for quality management. CONCLUSIONS: A community of practice framework incorporating the success elements described in the systematic review of the literature can be used as a valuable model for collaboration amongst surgeons and healthcare organizations to improve quality of care and foster continuing professional development.

Brachytherapy and local excision for sphincter preservation in T1 and T2 rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To report long-term results of brachytherapy after local excision (LE) in the treatment of T1 and T2 rectal cancer at risk of recurrence due to residual subclinical disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1989 and 2007, 32 patients undergoing LE and brachytherapy were followed prospectively for a mean of 6.2 years. Estimates of local recurrence (LR), disease-specific survival (DSS), and overall survival (OS) were generated. Treatment-related toxicity and the effect of known prognostic factors were determined. RESULTS: There were 8 LR (3 T1, 5 T2), of which 5 were salvaged surgically. Median time to the 8 LR was 14 months, and the 5-year rate of local control was 76%. Although there have been 9 deaths to date, only 5 were from disease. Five-year DSS and OS rates were 85% and 78%, respectively. There were 4 cases of Grade 2-3 radionecrosis and 1 case of mild stool incontinence. The sphincter was preserved in 27 of 32 patients. CONCLUSION: Local excision and adjuvant brachytherapy for T1 and T2 rectal cancer is an appealing treatment alternative to immediate radical resection, particularly in the frail and elderly who are unable to undergo major surgery, as well as for patients wanting to avoid a permanent colostomy.

Neoadjuvant therapy and anastomotic leak after tumor-specific mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate whether neoadjuvant therapy is a risk factor for anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review of 220 patients who underwent tumor-specific mesorectal excision for rectal cancer from 2000 to 2005 was performed. Risk factors for leak were identified by using a multivariable regression model. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy and surgery, whereas 166 received surgery alone. No difference in clinically significant leaks was observed between the two groups (5.6 vs. 6.6 percent, P = 1). A diverting ileostomy was performed in 26.4 percent of patients who received neoadjuvant therapy compared with 9.7 percent for surgery alone (P = 0.0021). Neoadjuvant patients were more likely to have ultralow anastomoses (17.6 vs. 2.5 percent, P < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, smoking (odds ratio, 6.37 (1.8, 22.2), P = 0.004), difficult anastomosis (odds ratio, 7.66 (1.8, 31.5), P = 0.0048), and low level of anastomosis (

Development of communities of practice to facilitate quality improvement initiatives in surgical oncology.

BACKGROUND: The process of developing clinical guidelines and standards for cancer treatment and screening is well established in the Ontario health care system; however, the dissemination and implementation of such guidelines and standards are more recent undertakings. Traditional implementation strategies to improve surgical practice and the delivery of cancer care have not been consistently effective. There is a recognized need to develop integrated models that offer direct support for implementation strategies. Such a model should be feasible, adaptable, and open to evaluation across diverse surgical settings. DISCUSSION: Research suggests that successful implementation should consider tools and expertise from other disciplines. This article considers a community of practice (COP) model to provide a supportive infrastructure for quality improvements in cancer surgery. The COP model was adapted for cancer surgeons. It is supported by 5 enablers referred to as tools: communication system, project development support, access to data, access to evidence review, and accreditation with continued medical education and continued professional development. These tools need to be part of an infrastructure that is both provided and supported by a team of administrators and health care professionals, who have active roles and responsibilities. Therefore, the primary objective of this article is to describe our COP model in cancer surgery including the key success factors necessary for providing the infrastructure and tools. The secondary objective is to offer the integrated COP model as a basis for future research and the evaluation of various collaborative improvement projects. SUMMARY: Building on knowledge management concepts, we identified the 4 essential processes that should be targeted by implementation strategies. A common COP evaluation framework uses the outcomes of 4 knowledge conversion modes-organizational memory, social capital, innovation, and knowledge transfer-as proxies for actual provider and organizational behavior. Insights from different collaborative improvement projects described in a consistent way could inform future research and assist in the collation of systematic reviews on this topic.

Standards for thoracic surgical oncology in a single-payer healthcare system.

Through systematic literature review and a consensus-based approach from an expert panel, standards on the organization for delivering thoracic cancer surgery in a single-payer healthcare environment were developed. Thirty-two studies and six organizational reports were identified. Results from 32 studies showed a trend toward higher volumes and improved patient outcomes, and six consensus reports provided recommendations on thoracic care standards. Thoracic surgical oncology standards in a single-payer healthcare system were developed. The benefits associated with the implementation of thoracic cancer surgery standards should result in increased regionalization of care, improved processes of care, and better patient outcomes.

Development of prostate cancer quality indicators: a modified Delphi approach.

OBJECTIVES: There is evidence of variation in both the processes and outcomes of prostate cancer care, resulting in possible harm to patients and increased costs to the health system. Care could be improved by first identifying critical, measurable indicators that correlate with quality of care. This work was conducted to develop indicators of prostate cancer care using a modified three-step Delphi approach. METHODS: A 17-member multidisciplinary panel reviewed potential indicators extracted from the medical literature through two consecutive rounds of rating followed by consensus discussion. The panel then prioritized the indicators selected in the previous two rounds. RESULTS: Of 31 possible indicators that emerged from 49 reviewed articles, 11 were prioritized by the panel as benchmarks for assessing the quality of surgical care for prostate cancer. The 11 indicators represent three levels of measurement (regional, hospital, individual provider) across several phases of care (diagnosis, surgery, pathology, and follow-up), as well as broad measures of outcomes. CONCLUSION: A systematic evidence- and consensus-based approach was used to develop quality indicators of prostate cancer care, with a focus on pre-, peri- and post-operative care as well as outcomes. Some of the indicators selected by the panel were also recommended by a similarly structured panel process. These indicators can be used by individual providers and organizations to monitor the quality of their services, and develop interventions to address any variations.

Development of ovarian cancer surgery quality indicators using a modified Delphi approach.

OBJECTIVE: Little performance measurement has been undertaken in the area of oncology, particularly for surgery which is a pivotal event in the continuum of cancer care. This work was conducted to develop indicators of quality ovarian cancer surgery using a modified three-step Delphi approach. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel, comprised of surgical and methodologic co-chairs, nine surgeons, one medical oncologist, one radiation oncologist, a nurse, and a pathologist, reviewed potential indicators extracted from the medical literature through two consecutive rounds of rating followed by consensus discussion. The panel then prioritized the indicators selected in the previous two rounds. RESULTS: Of 33 possible indicators that emerged from 41 selected articles, 14 were prioritized by the panel as benchmarks for assessing the quality of surgical care. The 14 indicators represent three levels of measurement (provincial/regional, hospital, individual provider) across several phases of care (diagnosis, surgery, pathology, and adjuvant therapy), as well as broad measures of access and outcomes. Some of the indicators selected by the panel were also recommended as standards of care by national initiatives in other countries. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic evidence- and consensus-based approach was used to develop quality indicators of ovarian cancer care, with a focus on pre-, peri-, and postoperative care as well as outcomes, that are applicable in any jurisdiction.

Development of quality indicators for colorectal cancer surgery, using a 3-step modified Delphi approach.

BACKGROUND: Little performance measurement has been undertaken in the area of oncology, particularly for surgery, which is a pivotal event in the continuum of cancer care. This work was conducted to develop indicators of quality for colorectal cancer surgery, using a 3-step modified Delphi approach. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel, comprising surgical and methodological co-chairs, 9 surgeons, a medical oncologist, a radiation oncologist, a nurse and a pathologist, reviewed potential indicators extracted from the medical literature through 2 consecutive rounds of rating followed by consensus discussion. The panel then prioritized the indicators selected in the previous 2 rounds. RESULTS: Of 45 possible indicators that emerged from 30 selected articles, 15 were prioritized by the panel as benchmarks for assessing the quality of surgical care. The 15 indicators represent 3 levels of measurement (provincial/regional, hospital, individual provider) across several phases of care (diagnosis, surgery, adjuvant therapy, pathology and follow-up), as well as broad measures of access and outcome. The indicators selected by the panel were more often supported by evidence than those that were discarded. CONCLUSIONS: This project represents a unique initiative, and the results may be applicable to colorectal cancer surgery in any jurisdiction.

The role of knowledge translation for cancer control in Canada.

The definition and scope of cancer control has been evolving since its inception. The most recent model of cancer control in Canada has acknowledged the importance of knowledge translation to ensure that research results are implemented in practice and will be used to inform policy. However, without effort, the process of translation does not happen on a consistent basis. Knowledge translation focusses on improving the adoption of an innovation, e.g., research results. A number of health organizations in Canada have identified knowledge translation as an important activity and have begun to develop departments or initiatives dedicated to its achievement. As the emphasis in cancer control is on the application of knowledge, knowledge translation has a role to play in attaining the objectives of cancer control in Canada. It is an ideal time for the Canadian Strategy for Cancer Control and other Canadian cancer control initiatives to determine where they will locate knowledge translation in relation to their objectives.

Improving cancer surgery in Ontario: recommendations from a strategic planning retreat.

INTRODUCTION: The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care mandated a rapid and thorough change in the delivery of cancer services in Ontario to integrate ambulatory services offered by Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) with the inpatient services of affiliated hospitals. The CCO Surgical Oncology Program held a strategic planning retreat to establish the basis upon which to implement surgery-specific changes. METHODS: Participants completed a pre-retreat survey. Based on survey results, the retreat was organized around 4 themes: role of the Surgical Oncology Program; knowledge transfer; funding for cancer surgery; and research priorities. These topics were discussed in small breakout groups and by the entire assembly. RESULTS: Retreat participants (n = 55) included hospital CEOs, vice-presidents of cancer services, surgeons from cancer centres and community hospitals, academic chairs of surgery, clinician researchers and managers from CCO. Responses to the pre-retreat survey (n = 38) and recommendations made by retreat participants showed strong support for the Surgical Oncology Program to take a leadership role in the development and monitoring of quality indicators, research related to cancer surgery and the creation of regional communities of practice. Funding mechanisms for cancer surgeons and hospitals performing cancer surgery were also highlighted. CONCLUSION: The Surgical Oncology Program used the results to develop a strategic plan that was approved by retreat participants and the board of the CCO. The program has embarked on a multifaceted approach to facilitate, monitor and report on the organization and delivery of cancer surgery in Ontario.

Better knowledge translation for effective cancer control: a priority for action.

Increasing cancer rates are a world wide problem. Efforts towards controlling cancer are most effectively implemented through national cancer control programs. The literature has emphasized prevention and screening as main starting points; by applying what we know a substantial amount of cancer could be prevented. As well, in the areas of access to care, treatment and palliation, there are also many gains to be made. However, despite advances in fundamental and applied research across the cancer continuum, there continue to be delays between research discovery and application. Translation of research knowledge has focused on means traditionally part of the research process such as publication in journals. While knowledge may be disseminated via these methods, they appear to have little impact on implementation of new approaches in practice or policy. Research in the area of knowledge translation identifies important elements and strategies most effective in the translation of research findings. Adding a knowledge translation component to national cancer control programs can help ensure that even small efforts directed at cancer control can have maximum impact.