Adherence to French and ESGO Quality Indicators in Ovarian Cancer Surgery: An Ad-Hoc Analysis from the Prospective Multicentric CURSOC Study.
France
ovarian cancer
quality indicators
surgery
Journal
Cancers
ISSN: 2072-6694
Titre abrégé: Cancers (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101526829
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 Mar 2021
30 Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
18
02
2021
revised:
18
03
2021
accepted:
25
03
2021
entrez:
3
4
2021
pubmed:
4
4
2021
medline:
4
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Quality Indicators for ovarian cancer (OC) have been developed by the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and by the French National Cancer Institute (Institut National du Cancer, INCa). The aim of the study was to characterize OC care distribution in France by case-volume and to prospectively evaluate the adherence of high-volume institutions to INCa/ESGO quality indicators. The cost-utility of radical surgery in ovarian cancer (CURSOC) trial is a prospective, multicenter, comparative and non-randomized study that includes patients with stage IIIC-IV epithelial OC treated in nine French health care tertiary institutions. Adherence to institutional quality indicators were anonymously assessed by an independent committee. OC care distribution in France were provided by the nationwide database of hospital procedures. More than half of patients are treated in low-volume institutions. Among the nine high-volume centers participating in the study, four (44.4%) met all institutional INCa/ESGO quality indicators. The other five (55.6%) did not fulfil one of the quality indicator criteria. Access to high-volume OC providers in France is restricted to a minority of patients, and yet half of the referral institutions included in this study failed to meet all recommended institutional quality indicators. It is mandatory that national authorities work both to improve OC centralization and to incorporate quality assurance programs into certified centers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Quality Indicators for ovarian cancer (OC) have been developed by the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and by the French National Cancer Institute (Institut National du Cancer, INCa). The aim of the study was to characterize OC care distribution in France by case-volume and to prospectively evaluate the adherence of high-volume institutions to INCa/ESGO quality indicators.
METHODS
METHODS
The cost-utility of radical surgery in ovarian cancer (CURSOC) trial is a prospective, multicenter, comparative and non-randomized study that includes patients with stage IIIC-IV epithelial OC treated in nine French health care tertiary institutions. Adherence to institutional quality indicators were anonymously assessed by an independent committee. OC care distribution in France were provided by the nationwide database of hospital procedures.
RESULTS
RESULTS
More than half of patients are treated in low-volume institutions. Among the nine high-volume centers participating in the study, four (44.4%) met all institutional INCa/ESGO quality indicators. The other five (55.6%) did not fulfil one of the quality indicator criteria.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Access to high-volume OC providers in France is restricted to a minority of patients, and yet half of the referral institutions included in this study failed to meet all recommended institutional quality indicators. It is mandatory that national authorities work both to improve OC centralization and to incorporate quality assurance programs into certified centers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33808284
pii: cancers13071593
doi: 10.3390/cancers13071593
pmc: PMC8037412
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Subventions
Organisme : Institut National Du Cancer
ID : PRME 2014
Références
Cancer. 2007 Apr 15;109(8):1513-22
pubmed: 17354232
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011 Mar;90(3):273-9
pubmed: 21306310
Ann Oncol. 2017 Nov 1;28(suppl_8):viii25-viii29
pubmed: 29232471
Ann Oncol. 2013 Nov;24(11):2732-9
pubmed: 23857961
Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Jan;136(1):11-7
pubmed: 25449311
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Feb;132(2):403-10
pubmed: 24361578
Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Jun;145(3):493-499
pubmed: 28366546
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006 Feb 1;98(3):163-71
pubmed: 16449676
Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Dec;115(3):334-8
pubmed: 19766295
Bull Cancer. 2016 Nov;103(11):935-940
pubmed: 27769513
J Clin Oncol. 2002 Mar 1;20(5):1248-59
pubmed: 11870167
Gynecol Oncol. 2006 Jan;100(1):33-7
pubmed: 16153692
Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Apr;113(1):68-74
pubmed: 19176236
Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Jun;121(6):1217-1225
pubmed: 23812455
J Am Coll Surg. 2009 Apr;208(4):614-20
pubmed: 19476798
Gynecol Oncol. 2010 Apr;117(1):18-22
pubmed: 20106512
Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Aug;23(8):2515-21
pubmed: 27008588
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018 Feb;28(2):316-322
pubmed: 29324538
Gynecol Oncol. 2020 Sep;158(3):614-621
pubmed: 32709536
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Nov 10;30(32):3976-82
pubmed: 23032619
Gynecol Oncol. 2010 Mar;116(3):351-7
pubmed: 20022092
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016 Sep;26(7):1354-63
pubmed: 27648648
Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Jun 1;121(3):615-9
pubmed: 21414656
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021 Feb;47(2):360-366
pubmed: 32863097
Cancer Sci. 2004 Mar;95(3):233-7
pubmed: 15016322