Evaluating compliance with process-related quality metrics and survival in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: Multi-institutional oral cavity collaboration study.
head and neck cancer survival
multi-institutional study
oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma
process-related metrics
quality metrics
Journal
Head & neck
ISSN: 1097-0347
Titre abrégé: Head Neck
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8902541
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2021
01 2021
Historique:
received:
04
02
2020
revised:
01
08
2020
accepted:
24
08
2020
pubmed:
13
9
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
entrez:
12
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Process-related measures have been proposed as quality metrics in head and neck cancer care. A recent single-institution study identified four key metrics associated with increased survival. This study sought to validate the association of these quality metrics with survival in a multi-institutional cohort. Multicenter retrospective study of patients with oral cavity squamous cell (1/2005-1/2015). Baseline patient and disease characteristics and compliance with quality metrics was evaluated. Association between compliance with quality metrics with overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and disease-specific survival (DSS) was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models. Failure to comply with two or more of the quality metrics was associated with worse OS, DFS, and DSS. Adherence to all or all but one of the quality metrics was found to be associated with improved survival. Process-related quality metrics are associated with increased survival in patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma in a multi-institutional cohort.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Process-related measures have been proposed as quality metrics in head and neck cancer care. A recent single-institution study identified four key metrics associated with increased survival. This study sought to validate the association of these quality metrics with survival in a multi-institutional cohort.
METHODS
Multicenter retrospective study of patients with oral cavity squamous cell (1/2005-1/2015). Baseline patient and disease characteristics and compliance with quality metrics was evaluated. Association between compliance with quality metrics with overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and disease-specific survival (DSS) was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models.
RESULTS
Failure to comply with two or more of the quality metrics was associated with worse OS, DFS, and DSS. Adherence to all or all but one of the quality metrics was found to be associated with improved survival.
CONCLUSIONS
Process-related quality metrics are associated with increased survival in patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma in a multi-institutional cohort.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
60-69Informations de copyright
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Institute of Medicine. In: Hewitt M, Simone JV, eds. Ensuring Quality Cancer Care. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 1999. https://doi.org/10.17226/6467.
Donabedian A. The Definition of Quality and Approaches in Assessment. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press; 1980.
Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB, Birkmeyer NJO. Measuring the quality of surgical care: structure, process, or outcomes? J Am Coll Surg. 2004;198(4):626-632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2003.11.017.
Hall M, Bebb OJ, Gale CP. Why report outcomes when process measures will suffice? Eur Hear J. 2016;3(1):1-3. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjqcco/qcw050.
Stulberg JJ, Delaney CP, Neuhauser DV, Aron DC, Fu P, Koroukian SM. Adherence to surgical care improvement project measures and the association with postoperative infections. JAMA. 2010;303(24):2479-2485. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.841.
CoC Quality of Care Measures. 2019 https://www.facs.org/qualityprograms/cancer/ncdb/qualitymeasures. Accessed April 14, 2019.
Chen AY. The development of quality of care measures for oral cavity cancer. Laryngoscope. 2003;109(3):518-521. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-199903000-00035.
Reg-ENT: ENT Clinical Data Registry. http://www.entnet.org/content/regent-ent-clinical-data-registry. Accessed October 4, 2019.
Hessel AC, Moreno MA, Hanna EY, et al. Compliance with quality assurance measures in patients treated for early oral tongue cancer. Cancer. 2010;116(14):3408-3416. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25031.
Graboyes EM, Gross J, Kallogjeri D, et al. Association of compliance with process-related quality metrics and improved survival in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;142(5):430-437. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2015.3595.
Appachi S, Shah J, Reddy C, Bowen A, Koyfman S, Lamarre E. Analysis of process-related quality metrics and survival of patients with Oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019;161(3):450-457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599819845864.
Koyfman SA, Ismaila N, Crook D, et al. Management of the neck in squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity and oropharynx: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(20):1753-1774. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.18.01921.
Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Stewart AK, et al. Lymph node evaluation as a colon cancer quality measure: a national hospital report card. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(18):1310-1317. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djn293.
Crozier J, Papa N, Perera M, et al. Lymph node yield in node-negative patients predicts cancer specific survival following radical cystectomy for transitional cell carcinoma. Investig Clin Urol. 2017;58(6):416-422. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2017.58.6.416.
Zareba P, Rosenzweig B, Winer AG, Coleman JA. Association between lymph node yield and survival among patients undergoing radical nephroureterectomy for urothelial carcinoma of the upper tract. Cancer. 2017;123(10):1741-1750. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.30516.
Brenkman HJF, Goense L, Brosens LA, et al. A high hymph node yield is associated with prolonged survival in elderly patients undergoing curative gastrectomy for cancer: a dutch population-based cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(8):2213-2223. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5815-5.
D'Cruz AK, Vaish R, Kapre N, et al. Elective versus therapeutic neck dissection in node-negative oral cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(6):521-529. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1506007.
Kuo P, Mehra S, Sosa JA, et al. Proposing prognostic thresholds for lymph node yield in clinically lymph node-negative and lymph node-positive cancers of the oral cavity. Cancer. 2016;122(23):3624-3631. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.30227.
Divi V, Chen MM, Nussenbaum B, et al. Lymph node count from neck dissection predicts mortality in head and neck cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(32):3892-3897. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.67.3863.
Pou JD, Barton BM, Lawlor CM, Frederick CH, Moore BA, Hasney CP. Minimum lymph node yield in elective level I-III neck dissection. Laryngoscope. 2017;127(9):2070-2073. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.26545.
de Kort WWB, Maas SLN, Van Es RJJ, Willems SM. Prognostic value of the nodal yield in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review. Head Neck. 2019;41(8):2801-2810. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.25764.
Tsai CJ, Zheng J, Zhang Z, et al. Association of number of dissected lymph nodes with survival in clinically node-negative oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma patients undergoing primary surgery: a population-based analysis. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;143(10):1049-1052. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2017.0947.
Graboyes EM, Liou T-N, Kallogjeri D, Nussenbaum B, Diaz JA. Risk factors for unplanned hospital readmission in otolaryngology patients. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;149(4):562-571. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599813500023.
Zhao EH, Nishimori K, Brady J, et al. Analysis of risk factors for unplanned reoperation following free flap surgery of the head and neck. Laryngoscope. 2018;128(12):2790-2795. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.27417.
Helman SN, Brant JA, Moubayed SP, Newman JG, Cannady SB, Chai RL. Predictors of length of stay, reoperation, and readmission following total laryngectomy. Laryngoscope. 2017;127(6):1339-1344. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.26454.
Colevas AD, Yom SS, Pfister DG, et al. NCCN Guidelines Insights: Head and Neck Cancers, Version 1.2018. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. 2018;16(5):479-490. http://dx.doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2018.0026.
Graboyes EM, Townsend ME, Kallogjeri D, Piccirillo JF, Nussenbaum B. Evaluation of quality metrics for surgically treated laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;142(12):1154-1163. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2016.0657.
Luryi A, Chen M, Mehra S, Roman S, Sosa J, Judson B. Positive surgical margins in early stage oral cavity cancer: an analysis of 20,602 cases. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;151(6):984-990.
Al Feghali K, Ghanem A, Burmeister C, et al. Impact of smoking on pathological features in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. J Cancer Res Ther. 2019;15(3):582-588.
Binahmed A, Nason R, Abdoh A. The clinical significance of the positive surgical margin in oral cancer. Oral Oncol. 2007;43(8):780-784.