Using quality indicators to assess performance of endobronchial ultrasound in the staging and diagnosis of lung cancer: a pre/post study at a New Zealand centre.

Abstract

Aim: There are no data on the performance of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) in the staging and diagnosis of lung cancer in New Zealand. We aimed to assess the performance of EBUS-TBNA for lung cancer staging and diagnosis at our institution before and after the commencement of regular performance monitoring with comparison to published EBUS quality indicators.

Methods: The performance of EBUS-TBNA in the staging and diagnosis of lung cancer was assessed in two phases. Phase 1 consisted of a retrospective review of all lung cancer EBUS performed over a 2-year period. Published quality indicators were determined from the literature with relevant indicators being extracted and used to determine EBUS performance. Local reporting and education were undertaken and prospective data collection was commenced. Phase 2 consisted of prospective assessment of all lung cancer EBUS over the subsequent year. Performance of EBUS was then compared between phases 1 and 2 in order to determine the effect of performance monitoring and identify areas for service improvement.

Results: A total of 115 staging EBUS and 117 diagnostic EBUS were performed during the study period. Staging EBUS demonstrated good performance across phases 1 and 2 with high sensitivity and negative predictive values (NPV) for the detection of N2/3 disease, meeting published quality standards. During phase 2 there was evidence of a transition towards more guideline-concordant practice evidenced by more detailed nodal sampling during staging EBUS; however, this did not affect overall sensitivity or NPV. Diagnostic EBUS resulted in high rates of pathological confirmation meeting published quality standards across both phases. Pathway times were similar between phases 1 and 2, with reporting of molecular profiling being the predominant factor in delayed pathway times.

Conclusion: Monitoring and reporting of local performance allows critical assessment of practice and can identify areas for quality improvement. This review demonstrated good overall performance but prompted a move towards more guideline-concordant practice with increased mediastinal nodal sampling during staging procedures. Consideration should be given to the adoption of routine EBUS performance monitoring within local and/or regional networks, which could be incorporated alongside the newly proposed Lung Cancer Clinical Quality Registry.