Understanding the challenges of adjuvant treatment measurement and reporting in breast cancer: cancer treatment measuring and reporting.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare accrediting organizations and insurers increasingly require reporting of clinical data, and cancer treatment is one area of enhanced scrutiny. OBJECTIVES: To compare rates of received versus reported adjuvant breast cancer treatments, and to assess barriers to measuring and reporting treatments to the tumor registry (TR) of a high-volume medical center with both hospital-based and community-based oncologists. RESEARCH DESIGN: We calculated rates of received treatments using data collected using chart abstraction (N=115) and compared these with rates of reported treatments from the TR (N=535). We conducted 31 indepth interviews with clinical and administrative informants. Asking about perceptions of the TR, current reporting methods, and reporting barriers. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using deductive and inductive methods. RESULTS: : Rates of reported versus received treatments were radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery 22% versus 84% (P < 0.0001); chemotherapy for stage 2 or 3: 17% versus 79% (P < 0.0001); hormonal therapy for stage 2 or 3: 1% versus 91% (P < 0.0001). Comparing community-based versus hospital-based oncologists' rates reported to the TR, we found the following differences: radiation therapy post-breast conserving surgery 12% versus 32% (< 0.0001); chemotherapy 8% versus 29% (< 0.0001); and hormonal therapy 0% versus 3% (0.09). We found 4 key barriers to measuring and reporting poor understanding about the TR, limited information technology capabilities, poor communication, and mistrust. CONCLUSIONS: : Efforts to improve cancer care quality by improved treatment reporting must overcome key barriers, especially those involving information exchange and mistrust. Communications between the TR and oncology practices must improve to facilitate better treatment measurement and reporting.

How to improve breast cancer care measurement and reporting: suggestions from a complex urban hospital.

Increasing scrutiny of clinical data reporting by healthcare accrediting organizations is challenging hospitals to improve measurement and reporting, especially in the area of cancer care. We sought to explore barriers to breast cancer adjuvant treatment measurement and reporting to a hospital tumor registry (TR) and to identify opportunities to improve these processes. We conducted 31 key informant interviews with administrators and clinicians associated with a large urban hospital that treats a high volume of breast cancer patients. In this setting, up to 40 percent of early-stage breast cancer cases are treated by community-based oncologists, but reporting to the hospital's TR has been problematic. We asked about barriers to treatment measurement and reporting and sought suggestions to improve these processes. We used deductive and inductive methods to analyze interview transcripts. We found seven management barriers to adjuvant treatment measurement and reporting: process complexity, limited understanding of TR reporting, competing priorities, resource needs, communications issues, lack of supporting information technologies (IT), and mistrust of management. The four facilitators of measurement and reporting we noted were increasing awareness, improving communications and relationships, enhancing IT, and promoting the value of measurement and reporting. Four factors deemed critical to successful improvements were organizational commitment, leadership support, resources, and communication. Organizations striving to improve cancer care quality must overcome key barriers, especially those involving gaps in understanding and communication. In practice, hospitals should make explicit efforts to educate physicians and administrators about the importance of treatment reporting and to improve communications between the hospital's TR and physicians to ensure that needed adjuvant therapies are appropriately delivered.

New accountability, new challenges: improving treatment reporting to a tumor registry.

BACKGROUND: As adjuvant treatment moves to outpatient settings, required reporting is problematic. We undertook a solutions-focused exercise to identify reporting barriers and devise a pilot improvement intervention. METHODS: We convened a multidisciplinary group of community-based oncologists, tumor registry (TR) staff, and hospital leadership. The group identified three key barriers to reporting: (1) inability to identify correct managing physician, (2) poor communication, and (3) manual reporting burden. Our intervention addressed the first two barriers and involved correcting physician contact information, simplifying contact forms, ascertaining cases in real time, and priming physician office staff to respond to TR requests. RESULTS: Preintervention, the TR did not identify any pilot patients' managing medical oncologists and little adjuvant treatment. During the April-May 2012 intervention, 22 patients with breast cancer listed our volunteer surgeon as managing physician. The TR sent 22 treatment letters to the surgeon's office and received 19 (86%) responses identifying the managing medical oncologist. Nine of the 19 cases (47%) were closed. To close a case required an average of 5.9 contacts and 28 minutes for electronic medical record-based cases and 38.9 minutes for community oncology cases. Sixty-four percent of required treatment was reported. Surgical staff spent ~0.5 hours per case to identify the oncologist prescribing adjuvant treatment. CONCLUSION: The solutions-focused exercise improved identification of managing oncologists from 0% to 86% for patients treated by community oncologists. Treatment reporting increased from 2.6% to 64%. The pilot did not address the burden of reporting, which remains great. Electronic records can reduce this burden, but this approach is not currently feasible for many oncologists.