J Gynecol Oncol | Volume 3, Issue 1 | Research Article | Open Access
Annemie L1, Wyckmans L1, Anne-Sophie B1, Xuan BT1,2 and Peter AVD1,2*
1Multidisciplinary Oncologic Centre Antwerp, Antwerp University Hospital, Belgium
2Centre for Oncological Research, University of Antwerp, Belgium
*Correspondance to: Peter A Van Dam
Fulltext PDFObjective: Measuring Quality Indicators (QI’s) is a tool to improve the quality of care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the acceptability of 36 QI’s, defined after a literature search (doi. org/10.1016/j.ejso.2018.10.051) for the management of endometrial, cervical and ovarian cancer. Relevant specialists in the field of interest were surveyed. Methods: To quantify the opinions of these specialists, an online survey was sent out via mailing to members of gynecological or oncological societies. The relevance of each QI was questioned on a scale from one to five (1= irrelevant, 2= less relevant, 3= no opinion/neutral, 4= relevant, 5= very relevant). If a QI received a score of 4 or 5 in 65% or more of the answers, we state that the respondents consider this QI to be sufficiently relevant to use in daily practice. Results: The survey was visited 238 times and resulted in 53 complete responses (29 Belgian, 24 other European countries). The majority of the specialists were gynecologists (45%). Five of the 36 QI’s (13.9%) did not reach the cut-off of 65%: Referral to a tertiary center, preoperative staging of endometrial cancer by MRI, preoperative staging of cervical cancer by positron-emission tomography, incorporation of intracavitary brachytherapy in the treatment of cervical cancer, reporting ASA and WHO score for each patient. After removing the 5 QI’s that were not considered as relevant by the specialists and 3 additional 3 QI’s that we were considered to be superfluous, we obtained an optimized QI list. Conclusion: As QI’s gain importance in gynecological oncology, their use can only be of value if they are universally interpreted in the same manner. We propose an optimized list of 28 QI’s for the management of endometrial, cervical and ovarian cancer which responders of our survey found relevant. Further validation is needed to finalize and define a set of QI’s that can be used in future studies, audits and benchmarking.
Quality indicators; Survey; Endometrial cancer; Cervical Cancer; Ovarian Cancer
Annemie L, Wyckmans L, Anne-Sophie B, Xuan BT, Peter AVD. Acceptability of Quality Indicators for the Management of Endometrial, Cervical and Ovarian Cancer: Results of an Online Survey. J Gynecol Oncol. 2020; 3(1): 1023.