2022-RA-1395-ESGO Quality assessment as part of the quality assurance of a regional gynecological comprehensive cancer care network in the Netherlands. (20th October 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: de Kroon, Cor D; Walpot, Natascha; Mierlo, Ria van; Aa, Maaike vd; Gijsen, Brigitte; Boer, Anne-Marie den; Gelderblom, Hans; Hilders, Carina; Kagie, Marjolein
• Is Part Of: International journal of gynecological cancer. Volume 32(2022)Supplement 2
• Page Start: A461
• Page End: A462
• Publication Date: 2022-10-20
• Subjects: Generative organs, Female -- Cancer -- Periodicals; 616.99465
• DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2022-ESGO.997
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1048-891X

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction/Background: Given the increasing complexity and the volume standards which have become standard practise patients are more frequently treated in so called cancer networks in which different hospitals collaborate intensively. However instruments available for quality assurance are validated for individual hospitals. In the gynaecological cancer network established in our Regional Cancer Network (RO West which consists of 7 hospitals in the Leiden-The Hague area in the Netherlands) we aim to establish network wide quality assurance and consequently adopt well known instruments for usage in networks. In this abstract we report on the quality assessment of the cancer care pathway for ovarian cancer patients in our gynaecological cancer care network. Methodology: Indicators with regard to quality of care in cancer networks were extracted from the national Clinical Cancer Network Guidance Book and the national SONCOS standards for oncology and aligned with global Qmentum standards. 5 different fields were covered by 32 standards (organisation/governance, patient care, research, quality assurance, research and sharing knowledge). Moreover 26 ovarian cancer specific and relevant key pathway and care outcomes indicators were defined. A day was set to visit all 7 hospitals for interviews regarding the indicators with all stakeholders, including patients. Results: All 7 hospitals were visited and relevant stakeholders were interviewed. Network specific indicators were al met, each hospital did not meet different hospital specific indicators, the Dutch Cancer registry was used to get hold of the outcome and pathway indicators and revealed minor differences between the hospitals. Improvement points and action plans were written. Conclusion: Network wide quality assessments, using qualitative and quantitative indicators are feasible and valid as part of the quality assurance program of cancer networks and regional cancer care pathways. Future assessments will be necessary to evaluate to which extend current governance allows alterations for improvement in individual hospitals.