• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

国家癌症护理质量倡议的结果:我们如何提高美国的癌症护理质量?

Results of the National Initiative for Cancer Care Quality: how can we improve the quality of cancer care in the United States?

作者信息

Malin Jennifer L, Schneider Eric C, Epstein Arnold M, Adams John, Emanuel Ezekiel J, Kahn Katherine L

机构信息

RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Oncol. 2006 Feb 1;24(4):626-34. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.03.3365. Epub 2006 Jan 9.

DOI:10.1200/JCO.2005.03.3365
PMID:16401682
Abstract

PURPOSE

In 1999, the National Cancer Policy Board called attention to the quality of cancer care in the United States and recommended establishing a quality monitoring system with the capability of regularly reporting on the quality of care for patients with cancer.

METHODS

Using data from a patient survey 4 years after diagnosis and review of medical records, we determined the percentage of stage I to III breast cancer and stage II to III colorectal cancer survivors in five metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) across the United States who received recommended care specified by a comprehensive set of explicit quality measures.

RESULTS

Two thousand three hundred sixty-six (63%) of 3,775 eligible patients responded to the survey, and 85% consented to have their medical records reviewed. Our final analytic sample (n = 1,765) included 47% of the eligible patients. Patients with breast and colorectal cancer received 86% of recommended care (95% CI, 86% to 87%) and 78% of recommended care (95% CI, 77% to 79%), respectively. Adherence to quality measures was less than 85% for 18 of the 36 breast cancer measures, and significant variation across MSAs was observed for seven quality measures. The percent adherence was less than 85% for 14 of the 25 colorectal cancer measures, and one quality measure demonstrated statistically significant variation across the MSAs.

CONCLUSION

Initial management of patients with breast and colorectal cancer in the United States seemed consistent with evidence-based practice; however, substantial variation in adherence to some quality measures point to significant opportunities for improvement.

摘要

目的

1999年,国家癌症政策委员会提请人们关注美国癌症护理的质量,并建议建立一个能够定期报告癌症患者护理质量的质量监测系统。

方法

利用诊断后4年患者调查的数据以及病历审查结果,我们确定了美国五个大都市统计区(MSA)中接受一套全面明确质量指标所规定的推荐护理的I至III期乳腺癌幸存者和II至III期结直肠癌幸存者的比例。

结果

3775名符合条件的患者中有2366名(63%)回应了调查,85%的患者同意审查其病历。我们的最终分析样本(n = 1765)包括47%的符合条件的患者。乳腺癌和结直肠癌患者分别接受了86%(95%置信区间,86%至87%)和78%(95%置信区间,77%至79%)的推荐护理。36项乳腺癌指标中有18项的质量指标依从率低于85%,7项质量指标在各MSA之间存在显著差异。25项结直肠癌指标中有14项的依从率低于85%,一项质量指标在各MSA之间存在统计学上的显著差异。

结论

美国乳腺癌和结直肠癌患者的初始管理似乎与循证实践一致;然而,在某些质量指标的依从性方面存在很大差异,这表明有很大的改进空间。

相似文献

1
Results of the National Initiative for Cancer Care Quality: how can we improve the quality of cancer care in the United States?国家癌症护理质量倡议的结果:我们如何提高美国的癌症护理质量?
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Feb 1;24(4):626-34. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.03.3365. Epub 2006 Jan 9.
2
American Society of Clinical Oncology/National Comprehensive Cancer Network Quality Measures.美国临床肿瘤学会/美国国立综合癌症网络质量指标
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Jul 20;26(21):3631-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.5068.
3
National quality validation programs for breast centers.乳腺中心的国家质量验证计划。
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2007 Oct;7(10):1357-62. doi: 10.1586/14737140.7.10.1357.
4
Adherence to quality indicators and survival in patients with breast cancer.乳腺癌患者对质量指标的依从性与生存率
Med Care. 2009 Feb;47(2):217-25. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181893c4a.
5
Implementation of the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative at a university comprehensive cancer center.在一所大学综合癌症中心实施肿瘤学质量实践倡议。
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Aug 10;27(23):3802-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.21.6770. Epub 2009 Jun 1.
6
National Quality Measures for Breast Centers (NQMBC): a robust quality tool: breast center quality measures.国家乳腺中心质量指标(NQMBC):一个强有力的质量工具:乳腺中心质量指标。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Feb;17(2):377-85. doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0729-5. Epub 2009 Oct 16.
7
Assessment of the scientific soundness of clinical performance measures: a field test of the National Committee for Quality Assurance's colorectal cancer screening measure.临床绩效指标科学合理性评估:美国国家质量保证委员会结直肠癌筛查指标的现场测试
Arch Intern Med. 2008 Apr 28;168(8):876-82. doi: 10.1001/archinte.168.8.876.
8
Variations in quality of care for men with early-stage prostate cancer.早期前列腺癌男性患者护理质量的差异。
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Aug 1;26(22):3735-42. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.2555.
9
[Evaluation of patient satisfaction with the quality of health care received within the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 trial by patients with breast and colorectal cancer, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma at different stages. Correlation with sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities and other procedural variables at the Mexican Institute of Social Security].[在EORTC IN - PATSAT32试验中,对不同阶段的乳腺癌、结直肠癌和非霍奇金淋巴瘤患者所接受医疗保健质量的患者满意度评估。与墨西哥社会保障研究所的社会人口学特征、合并症及其他程序变量的相关性]
Value Health. 2011 Jul-Aug;14(5 Suppl 1):S96-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.05.026.
10
Using National Quality Forum breast cancer indicators to measure quality of care for patients in an AVON comprehensive breast center.利用国家质量论坛乳腺癌指标来衡量 AVON 综合乳腺中心患者的护理质量。
Breast J. 2010 May-Jun;16(3):240-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.00909.x. Epub 2010 Apr 12.

引用本文的文献

1
"Colorectal Cancer Care Quality in a Developing Country: Insights from a Comparison of Teaching and Non-teaching Hospitals in Iran".发展中国家的结直肠癌护理质量:来自伊朗教学医院与非教学医院比较的见解
PLoS One. 2025 Sep 8;20(9):e0326796. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0326796. eCollection 2025.
2
Colorectal Cancer Characteristics and Mortality From Propensity Score-Matched Cohorts of Urban and Rural Veterans.城市和农村退伍军人倾向得分匹配队列中的结直肠癌特征与死亡率
Fed Pract. 2025 May;42(Suppl 2):S22-S29b. doi: 10.12788/fp.0560. Epub 2025 May 8.
3
Didactic Instruction's Impact on Medicolegal Quality of Radiation Oncology Resident Physician Documentation.
教学指导对放射肿瘤学住院医师病历的法医学质量的影响。
J Cancer Educ. 2025 Apr;40(2):266-272. doi: 10.1007/s13187-024-02508-8. Epub 2024 Sep 24.
4
Measuring the quality of care in metastatic colorectal cancer: a scoping review of quality indicators.测量转移性结直肠癌护理质量:质量指标的范围综述。
JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2024 Sep 2;8(5). doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkae073.
5
Quality of Care for Prostate Cancer in Kashmir, India: A Real-World Study.印度克什米尔地区前列腺癌的医疗质量:一项真实世界研究。
Cureus. 2023 Aug 15;15(8):e43507. doi: 10.7759/cureus.43507. eCollection 2023 Aug.
6
Patterns of better breast cancer care in countries with higher human development index and healthcare expenditure: Insights from GLOBOCAN 2020.高人类发展指数和高医疗支出国家中更好的乳腺癌护理模式:来自 GLOBOCAN 2020 的洞察。
Front Public Health. 2023 Apr 12;11:1137286. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1137286. eCollection 2023.
7
Expansion of the quality of care index on breast cancer and its risk factors using the global burden of disease study 2019.利用 2019 年全球疾病负担研究扩展乳腺癌及其危险因素的护理质量指数。
Cancer Med. 2023 Jan;12(2):1729-1743. doi: 10.1002/cam4.4951. Epub 2022 Jun 30.
8
Development of Population-Based Cancer Indicators and a Measurement of Cancer Care Continuum Using a Modified Delphi Method.基于人群的癌症指标的制定以及使用改良德尔菲法对癌症护理连续体的测量。
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Sep 27;13(19):4826. doi: 10.3390/cancers13194826.
9
Factors Associated With State-Specific Medicaid Expansion and Receipt of Autologous Breast Reconstruction Among Patients Undergoing Mastectomy.与接受乳房切除术的患者接受州特定医疗补助扩展和自体乳房重建相关的因素。
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Aug 2;4(8):e2119141. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.19141.
10
Exploring patient experiences of cancer care in Northern Ireland: A thematic analysis of free-text responses to the 2018 Northern Ireland Patient Experience Survey (NICPES).探索北爱尔兰癌症护理患者体验:对 2018 年北爱尔兰患者体验调查(NICPES)自由文本回复的主题分析。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Jun 7;21(1):564. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06577-z.