Suppr超能文献

了解前列腺癌手术治疗质量的差异。

Understanding variation in the quality of the surgical treatment of prostate cancer.

作者信息

Schroeck Florian R, Jacobs Bruce L, Hollenbeck Brent K

机构信息

From the Divisions of Health Services Research and Urologic Oncology, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

出版信息

Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2013:278-83. doi: 10.14694/EdBook_AM.2013.33.278.

Abstract

More than 80% of men with prostate cancer undergo active treatment, which can be associated with significant morbidity. Outcomes of surgical treatment vary widely depending on who treated the patient and where the patient was treated, implying that there is room for improvement. Factors influencing outcomes include patient characteristics as well as some measure of procedure volume. Although relationships between volume and outcomes for prostatectomy can most likely be explained by differences between surgeons (e.g., experience, technical skill), the hospital environment (e.g., team communication, safety culture) has the potential to either amplify or dampen the effects. Although most patient factors are immutable, these other aspects of surgical care and the delivery environment provide opportunities for quality improvement. Collaborative quality improvement initiatives may prove to be an important vehicle for achieving better prostate cancer care. These grass roots organizations, driven largely by urologists dedicated to providing prostate cancer care, have had initial successes in improving some aspects of quality in prostate cancer care, including reducing unwarranted use of imaging and perioperative morbidity. However, much of the variation in functional outcomes after prostate cancer surgery arises from differences in technical skill. Evaluating and improving intraoperative surgeon performance will inevitably be challenging, as they require acquisition and interpretation of data collected in the operating room. To this end, several methods have been described to objectively assess what happens in the operating room.

摘要

超过80%的前列腺癌男性患者接受积极治疗,这可能会带来显著的发病率。手术治疗的结果差异很大,这取决于治疗患者的医生以及患者接受治疗的地点,这意味着仍有改进的空间。影响治疗结果的因素包括患者特征以及手术量的某种衡量标准。虽然前列腺切除术的手术量与治疗结果之间的关系很可能可以通过外科医生之间的差异(例如经验、技术技能)来解释,但医院环境(例如团队沟通、安全文化)有可能放大或减弱这些影响。虽然大多数患者因素是无法改变的,但手术护理和医疗服务环境的其他方面提供了质量改进的机会。协作式质量改进举措可能被证明是实现更好的前列腺癌护理的重要手段。这些基层组织主要由致力于提供前列腺癌护理的泌尿科医生推动,在改善前列腺癌护理质量的某些方面已取得初步成功,包括减少不必要的影像学检查使用和围手术期发病率。然而,前列腺癌手术后功能结果的很大一部分差异源于技术技能的差异。评估和改善术中外科医生的表现必然具有挑战性,因为这需要获取和解读在手术室收集的数据。为此,已经描述了几种方法来客观评估手术室中发生的情况。

相似文献

1
Understanding variation in the quality of the surgical treatment of prostate cancer.
Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2013:278-83. doi: 10.14694/EdBook_AM.2013.33.278.
2
Notable Outcomes and Trackable Events after Surgery: Evaluating an Uncomplicated Recovery after Radical Prostatectomy.
J Urol. 2016 Aug;196(2):399-404. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.083. Epub 2016 Feb 22.
3
Using video review to understand the technical variation of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a statewide surgical collaborative.
World J Urol. 2020 Jul;38(7):1607-1613. doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02906-4. Epub 2019 Aug 23.
8
Achieving Quality Assurance of Prostate Cancer Surgery During Reorganisation of Cancer Services.
Eur Urol. 2015 Jul;68(1):22-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.02.028. Epub 2015 Mar 11.
10
Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Sep 12;9(9):CD009625. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009625.pub2.

引用本文的文献

2
Adherence to performance measures and outcomes among men treated for prostate cancer.
J Urol. 2014 Sep;192(3):743-8. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.03.091. Epub 2014 Mar 25.

本文引用的文献

1
Safety culture and complications after bariatric surgery.
Ann Surg. 2013 Feb;257(2):260-5. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31826c0085.
2
Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Jul 17;157(2):120-34. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-2-201207170-00459.
3
Health care reform and its implications for the academic cancer center.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012 Jan;10(1):130-2. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2012.0012.
4
Prediction of erectile function following treatment for prostate cancer.
JAMA. 2011 Sep 21;306(11):1205-14. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.1333.
5
Regional collaboration to improve radiographic staging practices among men with early stage prostate cancer.
J Urol. 2011 Sep;186(3):844-9. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.04.078. Epub 2011 Jul 23.
6
How a regional collaborative of hospitals and physicians in Michigan cut costs and improved the quality of care.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Apr;30(4):636-45. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0526.
7
Overuse of imaging for staging low risk prostate cancer.
J Urol. 2011 May;185(5):1645-9. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.12.033. Epub 2011 Mar 17.
8
Objective assessment of technical surgical skills.
Br J Surg. 2010 Jul;97(7):972-87. doi: 10.1002/bjs.7115.
9
Time trends and local variation in primary treatment of localized prostate cancer.
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Mar 1;28(7):1117-23. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.0133. Epub 2010 Feb 1.
10
Impact of surgeon and hospital volume on outcomes of radical prostatectomy.
Urol Oncol. 2010 May-Jun;28(3):243-50. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2009.03.001. Epub 2009 Apr 22.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验