Institutional review of compliance with NCCN guidelines for breast cancer: lessons learned from real-time multidimensional synoptic reporting.

BACKGROUND: Variations exist in compliance with NCCN Guidelines. Prior reports of adherence to NCCN Guidelines contain limitations because of lack of contemporary review and incomplete listing of reasons for noncompliance. PURPOSE: To assess institutional compliance and assist national quality improvement strategies through identifying valid reasons for noncompliance. METHODS: Compliance with NCCN Guidelines was recorded prospectively using electronic synoptic templates for patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer treated at a single institution between January 2010 and December 2011. Compliance with NCCN Guidelines was recorded. The accuracy of real-time synoptic auditing methods compared with retrospective chart review and reasons for noncompliance was assessed. SAS 9.3 software was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Compliance with NCCN Guidelines among 395 patients was 94% for initial staging evaluation, 97% for surgery, 91% for chemotherapy, 89% for hormone therapy, 91% for radiation therapy, 85% for follow-up, and 100% for determination of estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor and HER2 status. Age, comorbidities, and stage influenced guideline compliance. The most common reasons for noncompliance were patient refusal, patient choice after shared decision-making, and overuse of testing. Synoptic templated reporting was accurate in 97% patients. CONCLUSIONS: High compliance with NCCN Guidelines was demonstrated. Reasons for noncompliance were identifiable. Compliance and nonadherence can be evaluated quickly with electronic synoptic reporting. This allows real-time action plans to address quality concerns and aids national risk adjustment for comparison and benchmarking.

Applying the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program risk calculator to patients undergoing colorectal surgery: theory vs reality.

BACKGROUND: Discussing potential morbidity and mortality is essential to informed decision-making and consent. The American College of Surgery National Surgical Quality Improvement Program developed an online risk calculator (RC) using patient-specific information to determine operative risk. STUDY DESIGN: Colorectal procedures at our independent academic medical center from 2010 to 2011 were evaluated. The RC's predicted outcomes were compared with observed outcomes. Statistical analysis included Brier score, Wilcoxon sign rank test, and standardized event ratio. RESULTS: There were 324 patients included. The RC's Brier score was .24 (.015-.219) for predicting mortality and morbidity, respectively. The observed event rate for surgical site infection and any complication was higher than the RC predicted (standardized event ratio 1.9 CI [1.49 to 2.39] and 1.39 CI [1.14 to 1.68], respectively). The observed length of stay was longer than predicted (5.6 vs 6.6 days, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The RC underestimated the surgical site infection and overall complication rates. The RC is a valuable tool in predicting risk for adverse outcomes; however, institution-specific trends may influence actual risk. Surgeons and institutions must recognize areas where they are outliers from estimated risks and tailor risk discussions accordingly.