Clinical Governance Program, Local Health Authority - IRCCS of Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Department of Medicine and Surgery, Unit of Biomedical, Biotechnological and Translational Science, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Feb 20;16(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0287-z.
Health services overuse has been acknowledged as a relevant policy issue. In this study, we assessed the informative value of research on the quality of cancer care, exploring to what extent it is actually concerned with care overuse, thus providing policy-makers with sound estimates of overuse prevalence. We searched Medline for European studies, reporting information on the rate of use of diagnostic or therapeutic procedures/interventions in breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer patients, published in English between 2006 and 2016. Individual studies were classified with regards to their orientation towards overuse according to the quality metrics adopted in assessing rates of use of procedures and interventions.Out of 1882 papers identified, 100 accounting for 94 studies met our eligibility criteria, most of them on breast (n = 38) and colorectal (n = 30) cancer. Of these, 46 (49%) studies relied on process indicators allowing a direct measure of under- or overuse, the latter being addressed in 22 (24%) studies. Search for overuse in patterns of care did not increase over time, with overuse being measured in 24% of the studies published before 2010, and in only 13% of those published in 2015-2016. Information on its prevalence was available only for a relatively limited number of procedures/interventions. Overall, estimates of overuse tended to be higher for diagnostic procedures (median prevalence across all studies, 24%) than for drugs, surgical procedures or radiotherapy (median overuse prevalence always lower than 10%). Despite its increasing policy relevance, overuse is still an often overlooked issue in current European research on the quality of care for cancer patients.
卫生服务过度使用已被认为是一个相关的政策问题。在这项研究中,我们评估了癌症护理质量研究的信息价值,探讨了它在多大程度上实际上与过度使用有关,从而为决策者提供有关过度使用流行率的可靠估计。我们在 Medline 上搜索了 2006 年至 2016 年间以英语发表的关于在乳腺癌、结直肠癌、肺癌和前列腺癌患者中使用诊断或治疗程序/干预措施的频率的欧洲研究报告信息。根据评估程序和干预措施使用频率的质量指标,根据对过度使用的倾向对个别研究进行分类。在确定的 1882 篇论文中,有 100 篇(占 94 项研究)符合我们的入选标准,其中大多数涉及乳腺癌(n = 38)和结直肠癌(n = 30)。其中,46 项(49%)研究依赖于允许直接衡量过度或不足使用的过程指标,22 项(24%)研究涉及后者。随着时间的推移,对护理模式中过度使用的搜索并没有增加,2010 年之前发表的研究中有 24%测量了过度使用,而 2015-2016 年发表的研究中只有 13%测量了过度使用。仅可获得相对有限数量的程序/干预措施的过度使用流行率信息。总体而言,与药物、手术程序或放射治疗相比,诊断程序的过度使用估计值(所有研究的中位数过度使用流行率为 24%)往往更高。尽管过度使用在政策方面的相关性日益增加,但在当前欧洲癌症患者护理质量研究中,过度使用仍然是一个经常被忽视的问题。