Raman Shankar, Tsoraides Steven S, Sylla Patricia, Sarin Ankit, Farkas Linda, DeKoster Erin, Hull Tracy, Wexner Steven
From the MercyOne Des Moines Surgical Group, Des Moines, IA (Raman).
Department of Surgery, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria; Department of Surgery, Springfield Clinic, Peoria, IL (Tsoraides).
J Am Coll Surg. 2022 Mar 1;234(3):368-376. doi: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000000054.
We identified commonly deficient standards across rectal cancer programs that underwent accreditation review by the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer to evaluate for patterns of noncompliance.
With the use of the internal database of the American College of Surgeons, programs that underwent accreditation review from 2018 to 2020 were evaluated. The occurrence and frequency of noncompliance with the standards, using the 2017 standards manual, were evaluated. Programs were further stratified based on the year of review, annual rectal cancer volume, and Commission on Cancer classification.
A total of 25 programs with annual rectal cancer volume from 14 to more than 200 cases per year underwent accreditation review. Only 2 programs achieved 100% compliance with all standards. Compliance with standards ranged from 48% to 100%. The 2 standards with the lowest level of compliance included standard 2.5 and standard 2.11 that require all patients with rectal cancer to be discussed at a multidisciplinary team meeting before the initiation of definitive treatment and within 4 weeks after definitive surgical therapy, respectively. Patterns of noncompliance persisted when programs were stratified on the basis oof the year of survey, annual rectal cancer volume, and Commission on Cancer classification. The corrective action process allowed all programs to ultimately become successfully accredited.
During this initial phase of the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer accreditation, the majority of programs undergoing review did not achieve 100% compliance and went through a corrective action process. Although the minimal multidisciplinary team meeting attendance requirements were simplified in the 2021 revised standards, noncompliance related to presentation of all patients at the multidisciplinary team meeting before and after definitive treatment highlights the need for programs seeking accreditation to implement optimized and standardized workflows to achieve compliance.
我们通过国家直肠癌认证计划对直肠癌项目进行认证审查,确定了常见的缺陷标准,以评估不合规模式。
利用美国外科医师学会的内部数据库,对2018年至2020年接受认证审查的项目进行评估。根据2017年标准手册,评估不符合标准的情况及频率。根据审查年份、年度直肠癌病例数和癌症委员会分类对项目进行进一步分层。
共有25个项目接受了认证审查,这些项目每年的直肠癌病例数从14例到200多例不等。只有2个项目所有标准的合规率达到100%。标准合规率从48%到100%不等。合规率最低的两个标准包括标准2.5和标准2.11,分别要求在确定性治疗开始前以及确定性手术治疗后4周内,在多学科团队会议上讨论所有直肠癌患者。当根据调查年份、年度直肠癌病例数和癌症委员会分类对项目进行分层时,不合规模式仍然存在。纠正措施流程使所有项目最终成功获得认证。
在国家直肠癌认证计划认证的初始阶段,大多数接受审查的项目未达到100%的合规率,并经历了纠正措施流程。尽管2021年修订标准简化了多学科团队会议的最低参会要求,但与在确定性治疗前后在多学科团队会议上介绍所有患者相关的不合规情况凸显了寻求认证的项目需要实施优化和标准化的工作流程以实现合规。