An overview of Clinical Quality Registries (CQRs) on gynecological oncology worldwide. Issue 10 (October 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Baldewpersad Tewarie, N.; van Driel, W.J.; van Ham, M.A.P.C.; Wouters, M.W.; Rome, R.M.; Høgdall, C.K.; Pagano, E.; Hogberg, T.; Kruitwagen, R.; Kruse, A.J.; Yigit, R.; van der Aa, M.; Mens, J.W.; Stam, T.C.; Diepstraten, J.; van der Kolk, A.; Engelen, M.
• Is Part Of: European journal of surgical oncology. Volume 48:Issue 10(2022)
• Page Start: 2094
• Page End: 2103
• Publication Date: 2022-10
• Subjects: Oncology -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Medical Oncology -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- surgery -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Cancérologie -- Périodiques; Oncologie; Chirurgie (geneeskunde); Electronic journals; Electronic journals -- Sciences; Electronic journals -- Medicine; Electronic journals; 616.994059005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2022.06.020
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0748-7983

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Clinical Quality Registries (CQRs) were initiated in order to compare clinical outcomes between hospitals or regions within a country. To get an overview of these CQRs worldwide the aim of this study was to identify these CQRs for gynecological oncology and to summarize their characteristics, processes and QI's and to establish whether it is feasible to make an international comparison in the future. Methods: To identify CQRs in gynecological oncology a literature search in Pubmed was performed. All papers describing the use of a CQR were included. Administrative, epidemiological and cancer registries were excluded as these registries do not primarily serve to measure quality of care through QI's. The taskforce or contact person of the included CQR were asked to participate and share information on registered items, processes and indicators. Results: Five nations agreed to collaborate: Australia, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden. Denmark, Netherlands and Sweden established a nationwide registry, collecting data on multiple tumor types, and various QI's. Australia and Italy included patients with ovarian cancer only. All nations had a different process to report feedback results to participating hospitals. Conclusion: CQRs serve the same purpose to improve quality of care but vary on different aspects. Although similarities are observed in the topics measured by the QI's, an international comparison was not feasible as numerators or denominators differ between registries. In order to compare on an international level it would be useful to harmonize these registries and to set an international standard to measure the quality of care with similar indicators.