22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program (NCCCP): Sustaining Quality and Reducing Disparities in Guideline‐Concordant Breast and Colon Cancer Care

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This study builds on analyses performed as part of an original comprehensive National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program evaluation and examines improvements in quality of care. The following research questions are addressed: (a) have improvements in concordance rates with the five quality of care measures been sustained since 2010 and (b) how does the change in concordance for minority/underserved patients compare to the change for nonminority/nonunderserved patients through 2013?

          Abstract

          Background.

          The National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program (NCCCP) pilot was designed to improve quality of cancer care and reduce disparities at community hospitals. The NCCCP's primary intervention was the implementation of the Commission on Cancer Rapid Quality Reporting System (RQRS). The RQRS is a hospital‐based data collection and evaluation system allowing near real‐time assessment of selected breast and colon cancer quality of care measures. Building on previous NCCCP analyses, this study examined whether improvements in quality cancer care within NCCCP hospitals early in the program were sustained and whether improvements were notable for minority or underserved populations.

          Methods.

          We compared changes in concordance with three breast and two colon cancer quality measures approved by the National Quality Forum for patients diagnosed at NCCCP hospitals from 2006 to 2007 (pre‐RQRS), 2008 to 2010 (early‐RQRS), and 2011 to 2013 (later‐RQRS). Data were obtained from NCCCP sites participating in the Commission on Cancer Rapid Quality Reporting System. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of concordance with breast and colon cancer quality measures.

          Results.

          The sample included 13,893 breast and 5,546 colon cancer patients. After RQRS initiation, all five quality measures improved significantly and improvements were sustained through 2013. Quality of care measures showed sustained improvements for both breast and colon cancer patients and for vulnerable patient subgroups including black, uninsured, and Medicaid‐covered patients.

          Conclusions.

          Quality improvements in NCCCP hospitals were sustained throughout the duration of the program, both overall and among minority and underserved patients. Because many individuals receive cancer treatment at community hospitals, facilitating high‐quality care in these environments must be a priority.

          Implications for Practice.

          Quality improvement programs often improve practice, but the methods are not maintained over time. The implementation of a real‐time quality reporting system and a network focused on improving quality of care sustained quality improvement at select community cancer centers. The NCCCP pilot increased numbers of patients receiving guideline‐concordant care for breast and colon cancer in community settings, and initial improvements noted in earlier years of RQRS were sustained into later years, both overall and among minority and underserved patients. National initiatives that improve care for diverse patient groups are important for reducing and eliminating barriers to care.

          Related collections

          Most cited references7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Improving clinical research and cancer care delivery in community settings: evaluating the NCI community cancer centers program

          Background In this article, we describe the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Cancer Centers Program (NCCCP) pilot and the evaluation designed to assess its role, function, and relevance to the NCI's research mission. In doing so, we describe the evolution of and rationale for the NCCCP concept, participating sites' characteristics, its multi-faceted aims to enhance clinical research and quality of care in community settings, and the role of strategic partnerships, both within and outside of the NCCCP network, in achieving program objectives. Discussion The evaluation of the NCCCP is conceptualized as a mixed method multi-layered assessment of organizational innovation and performance which includes mapping the evolution of site development as a means of understanding the inter- and intra-organizational change in the pilot, and the application of specific evaluation metrics for assessing the implementation, operations, and performance of the NCCCP pilot. The assessment of the cost of the pilot as an additional means of informing the longer-term feasibility and sustainability of the program is also discussed. Summary The NCCCP is a major systems-level set of organizational innovations to enhance clinical research and care delivery in diverse communities across the United States. Assessment of the extent to which the program achieves its aims will depend on a full understanding of how individual, organizational, and environmental factors align (or fail to align) to achieve these improvements, and at what cost.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Can the collective intentions of individual professionals within healthcare teams predict the team's performance: developing methods and theory

            Background Within implementation research, using theory-based approaches to understanding the behaviours of healthcare professionals and the quality of care that they reflect and designing interventions to change them is being promoted. However, such approaches lead to a new range of methodological and theoretical challenges pre-eminent among which are how to appropriately relate predictors of individual's behaviour to measures of the behaviour of healthcare professionals. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between the theory of planned behaviour proximal predictors of behaviour (intention and perceived behavioural control, or PBC) and practice level behaviour. This was done in the context of two clinical behaviours – statin prescription and foot examination – in the management of patients with diabetes mellitus in primary care. Scores for the predictor variables were aggregated over healthcare professionals using four methods: simple mean of all primary care team members' intention scores; highest intention score combined with PBC of the highest intender in the team; highest intention score combined with the highest PBC score in the team; the scores (on both constructs) of the team member identified as having primary responsibility for the clinical behaviour. Methods Scores on theory-based cognitive variables were collected by postal questionnaire survey from a sample of primary care doctors and nurses from northeast England and the Netherlands. Data on two clinical behaviours were patient reported, and collected by postal questionnaire survey. Planned analyses explored the predictive value of various aggregations of intention and PBC in explaining variance in the behavioural data. Results Across the two countries and two behaviours, responses were received from 37 to 78% of healthcare professionals in 57 to 93% practices; 51% (UK) and 69% (Netherlands) of patients surveyed responded. None of the aggregations of cognitions predicted statin prescription. The highest intention in the team (irrespective of PBC) was a significant predictor of foot examination. Conclusion These approaches to aggregating individually-administered measures may be a methodological advance of theoretical importance. Using simple means of individual-level measures to explain team-level behaviours is neither theoretically plausible nor empirically supported; the highest intention was both predictive and plausible. In studies aiming to understand the behaviours of teams of healthcare professionals in managing chronic diseases, some sort of aggregation of measures from individuals is necessary. This is not simply a methodological point, but a necessary step in advancing the theoretical and practical understanding of the processes that lead to implementation of clinical behaviours within healthcare teams.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Improving quality of cancer care at community hospitals: impact of the National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program pilot.

              Patients with cancer treated at community hospitals may experience decreased quality of care compared with patients treated at higher-volume cancer hospitals. The National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program (NCCCP) pilot is designed to enhance research and improve cancer care at community hospitals. We assessed changes in quality of care among the 16 initial NCCCP sites versus 25 similar hospitals that did not participate in the NCCCP.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                castrok@mail.nih.gov
                Journal
                Oncologist
                Oncologist
                10.1002/(ISSN)1549-490X
                The Oncologist
                oncologist
                theoncologist
                The Oncologist
                AlphaMed Press
                1083-7159
                1549-490X
                09 May 2017
                August 2017
                1 February 2018
                : 22
                : 8 ( doiID: 10.1002/onco.v22.8 )
                : 910-917
                Affiliations
                [ a ]RTI International, Research Triangle Park , North Carolina, USA
                [ b ]RTI International , Washington, DC, USA
                [ c ]National Cancer Institute , Rockville, Maryland, USA
                [ d ]Improving Healthcare Systems Research Program, Patient‐Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) , Washington, DC, USA
                Author notes
                [*] [* ]Correspondence: Kathleen Castro, R.N., National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 3E514, Rockville, Maryland 20892, USA. Telephone: 240‐276‐6834; e‐mail: castrok@ 123456mail.nih.gov
                Article
                ONCO12135
                10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0252
                5553955
                28487466
                f8014cca-5b4d-4fb3-88d4-0d79acb01df1
                © AlphaMed Press 2017
                History
                : 27 June 2016
                : 09 March 2017
                Page count
                Pages: 8
                Funding
                Funded by: National Cancer Institute (NCI) , http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000054;
                Award ID: HHSN261200800001E
                Categories
                36
                3
                6
                Community Outreach

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                quality improvement,quality indicators,health care,health care disparities,breast neoplasms,colonic neoplasms

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content241

                Cited by4

                Most referenced authors71