Defining the quality of interdisciplinary care for patients with brain metastases: modified Delphi panel recommendations.

IF 41.6 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Lancet Oncology Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00198-0
Camilo E Fadul, Jason P Sheehan, Julio Silvestre, Gloribel Bonilla, Joseph A Bovi, Manmeet Ahluwalia, Riccardo Soffietti, David Hui, Roger T Anderson
{"title":"Defining the quality of interdisciplinary care for patients with brain metastases: modified Delphi panel recommendations.","authors":"Camilo E Fadul, Jason P Sheehan, Julio Silvestre, Gloribel Bonilla, Joseph A Bovi, Manmeet Ahluwalia, Riccardo Soffietti, David Hui, Roger T Anderson","doi":"10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00198-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The value of interdisciplinary teams in improving outcomes and quality of care of patients with brain metastases remains uncertain, partly due to the lack of consensus on key indicators to evaluate interprofessional care. We aimed to obtain expert consensus across disciplines on indicators that evaluate the quality and value of brain metastases care. A steering committee of key opinion leaders curated relevant outcomes and process indicators from a literature review and a stakeholder needs assessment, and an international panel of physicians rated the outcomes and process indicators using a modified Delphi method. After three rounds, a consensus was reached on 29 indicators encompassing brain-directed oncological treatment, surgery, whole-brain radiotherapy, stereotactic radiosurgery, supportive or palliative care, and interdisciplinary team care. The Brain Metastases Quality-of-Care measure reflects the value and quality of brain metastases team-based care according to treatment modality and provides a benchmark of care for this under-studied patient population. The adoption, implementation, and sustainability of this set of indicators could help address the need expressed by patients with cancer, caregivers, and clinicians for more coordinated care across inpatient, outpatient, home, community, and tertiary academic settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":17942,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Oncology","volume":"25 9","pages":"e432-e440"},"PeriodicalIF":41.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00198-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The value of interdisciplinary teams in improving outcomes and quality of care of patients with brain metastases remains uncertain, partly due to the lack of consensus on key indicators to evaluate interprofessional care. We aimed to obtain expert consensus across disciplines on indicators that evaluate the quality and value of brain metastases care. A steering committee of key opinion leaders curated relevant outcomes and process indicators from a literature review and a stakeholder needs assessment, and an international panel of physicians rated the outcomes and process indicators using a modified Delphi method. After three rounds, a consensus was reached on 29 indicators encompassing brain-directed oncological treatment, surgery, whole-brain radiotherapy, stereotactic radiosurgery, supportive or palliative care, and interdisciplinary team care. The Brain Metastases Quality-of-Care measure reflects the value and quality of brain metastases team-based care according to treatment modality and provides a benchmark of care for this under-studied patient population. The adoption, implementation, and sustainability of this set of indicators could help address the need expressed by patients with cancer, caregivers, and clinicians for more coordinated care across inpatient, outpatient, home, community, and tertiary academic settings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
确定脑转移患者跨学科治疗的质量:修改后的德尔菲小组建议。
跨学科团队在改善脑转移患者预后和护理质量方面的价值仍不确定,部分原因是对评估跨专业护理的关键指标缺乏共识。我们旨在就评估脑转移治疗质量和价值的指标达成跨学科专家共识。由关键意见领袖组成的指导委员会从文献综述和利益相关者需求评估中整理出相关的结果和过程指标,并由国际医生小组采用改良德尔菲法对结果和过程指标进行评分。经过三轮评定,最终就 29 项指标达成共识,这些指标包括脑定向肿瘤治疗、手术、全脑放疗、立体定向放射手术、支持性或姑息治疗以及跨学科团队护理。脑转移瘤护理质量衡量标准根据治疗方式反映了脑转移瘤团队护理的价值和质量,并为这一研究不足的患者群体提供了护理基准。这套指标的采用、实施和可持续性有助于满足癌症患者、护理人员和临床医生的需求,即在住院、门诊、家庭、社区和三级学术环境中提供更加协调的护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Lancet Oncology
Lancet Oncology 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
62.10
自引率
1.00%
发文量
913
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Lancet Oncology is a trusted international journal that addresses various topics in clinical practice, health policy, and global oncology. It covers a wide range of cancer types, including breast, endocrine system, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, gynaecological, haematological, head and neck, neurooncology, paediatric, thoracic, sarcoma, and skin cancers. Additionally, it includes articles on epidemiology, cancer prevention and control, supportive care, imaging, and health-care systems. The journal has an Impact Factor of 51.1, making it the leading clinical oncology research journal worldwide. It publishes different types of articles, such as Articles, Reviews, Policy Reviews, Personal Views, Clinical Pictures, Comments, Correspondence, News, and Perspectives. The Lancet Oncology also collaborates with societies, governments, NGOs, and academic centers to publish Series and Commissions that aim to drive positive changes in clinical practice and health policy in areas of global oncology that require attention.
期刊最新文献
Fertility-sparing treatment and follow-up in patients with cervical cancer, ovarian cancer, and borderline ovarian tumours: guidelines from ESGO, ESHRE, and ESGE. AACR highlights advances and threats to US cancer research. Organisations withdraw from cancer conference over tobacco link. President Biden taking Cancer Moonshot global. Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors for individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer who progressed on EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1