Safety First: Developing and Deploying a System to Promote Safety and Quality in Your Clinic

Multidisciplinary survey on use of feeding tubes in head and neck cancer patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy in Germany-the SUFEETUBE project

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Data on enteral tube feeding in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy vary considerably between German institutions. This survey aims to investigate the management of feeding tubes in an interdisciplinary context across Germany.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between December 2022 and May 2023, 70 participants (42 radiation oncologists, 12 medical oncologists, 14 head and neck surgeons, and 2 physicians covering several specialties) responded to our web-based survey. In addition to the type of institution (university hospital, private practice, etc.), their age, and professional experience (in years), participants were asked several questions on the indication and institutional policy for tube placement and management (prophylactic/reactive nasogastric or gastrostomy tube). All questions were mandatory single- or multiple-choice questions, while additional comments were possible by email.

RESULTS

Most participants were employed at a university hospital (n = 52; 74.3%) and came from a radiation oncology background (n = 42; 60%). Fifty-four contributors (77.1%) reported that no nutritional risk screening prior to chemoradiotherapy was routinely performed, and 71.4% (n = 50) stated that no standardized protocol was used at the institution to set the indication for tube placement. Generally, policies and methods of tube feeding vary considerably between the individual institutions and specialties. However, the majority (n = 56, 80%) recommended a prophylactic percutaneous enteral gastrostomy (PEG) tube to their patients before chemoradiotherapy. Still, there was no consistent trend regarding the approach for reactive tube feeding.

CONCLUSION

The policies and methods of tube feeding vary considerably between the individual institutions and specialties in Germany. In the era of individualized medicine, uniform protocols are difficult to establish. However, a baseline nutritional risk screening could simplify decision-making in clinical practice.

Health-care organization characteristics in cancer care delivery: an integrated conceptual framework with content validation

Context can influence cancer-related outcomes. For example, health-care organization characteristics, including ownership, leadership, and culture, can affect care access, communication, and patient outcomes. Health-care organization characteristics and other contextual factors can also influence whether and how clinical discoveries reduce cancer incidence, morbidity, and mortality. Importantly, policy, market, and technology changes are transforming health-care organization design, culture, and operations across the cancer continuum. Consequently, research is essential to examine when, for whom, and how organizational characteristics influence person-level, organization-level, and population-level cancer outcomes. Understanding organizational characteristics-the structures, processes, and other features of entities involved in health care delivery-and their dynamics is an important yet understudied area of care delivery research across the cancer continuum. Research incorporating organizational characteristics is critical to address health inequities, test care delivery models, adapt interventions, and strengthen implementation. The field lacks conceptual grounding, however, to help researchers identify germane organizational characteristics. We propose a framework identifying organizational characteristics relevant for cancer care delivery research based on conceptual work in health services, organizational behavior, and management science and refined using a systematic review and key informant input. The proposed framework is a tool for organizing existing research and enhancing future cancer care delivery research. Following a 2012 Journal of the National Cancer Institute monograph, this work complements National Cancer Institute efforts to stimulate research addressing the relationship between cancer outcomes and contextual factors at the patient, provider, team, delivery organization, community, and health policy levels.

Risk management patterns in radiation oncology-results of a national survey within the framework of the Patient Safety in German Radiation Oncology (PaSaGeRO) project

PURPOSE

Risk management (RM) is a key component of patient safety in radiation oncology (RO). We investigated current approaches on RM in German RO within the framework of the Patient Safety in German Radiation Oncology (PaSaGeRO) project. Aim was not only to evaluate a status quo of RM purposes but furthermore to discover challenges for sustainable RM that should be addressed in future research and recommendations.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted from June to August 2021, consisting of 18 items on prospective and reactive RM, protagonists of RM, and self-assessment concerning RM. The survey was designed using LimeSurvey and invitations were sent by e‑mail. Answers were requested once per institution.

RESULTS

In all, 48 completed questionnaires from university hospitals, general and non-academic hospitals, and private practices were received and considered for evaluation. Prospective and reactive RM was commonly conducted within interprofessional teams; 88% of all institutions performed prospective risk analyses. Most institutions (71%) reported incidents or near-events using multiple reporting systems. Results were presented to the team in 71% for prospective analyses and 85% for analyses of incidents. Risk conferences take place in 46% of institutions. 42% nominated a manager/committee for RM. Knowledge concerning RM was mostly rated "satisfying" (44%). However, 65% of all institutions require more information about RM by professional societies.

CONCLUSION

Our results revealed heterogeneous patterns of RM in RO departments, although most departments adhered to common recommendations. Identified mismatches between recommendations and implementation of RM provide baseline data for future research and support definition of teaching content.

Why quality assurance is necessary in gynecologic radiation oncology

Quality assurance (QA) in radiation oncology involves all checks and processes that ensure that radiotherapy is delivered in an optimal and intended manner. QA is essential for the accurate delivery of brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy in patients diagnosed with gynecologic malignancies. Inadequate QA can adversely impact clinical outcomes and reduce the reliability of clinical trials. This review highlights the importance of QA in gynecologic radiation oncology and explores the pertinent issues related to its implementation.

Physician review of image registration and normal structure delineation

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion