Clinical Audit of the Radiotherapy Process in Rectal Cancer: Clinical Practice Guidelines and Quality Certification Do Not Avert Variability in Clinical Practice

IROCA-TES: Improving Quality in Radiation Oncology through Clinical Audits - Training and Education for Standardization

Background

Clinical audits are an important tool to objectively assess clinical protocols, procedures, and processes and to detect deviations from good clinical practice. The main aim of this project is to determine adherence to a core set of consensus- based quality indicators and then to compare the institutions in order to identify best practices.

Materials and methods

We conduct a multicentre, international clinical audit of six comprehensive cancer centres in Poland, Spain, Italy, Portugal, France, and Romania as a part of the project, known as IROCATES (Improving Quality in Radiation Oncology through Clinical Audits - Training and Education for Standardization).

Results

Radiotherapy practice varies from country to country, in part due to historical, economic, linguistic, and cultural differences. The institutions developed their own processes to suit their existing clinical practice.

Conclusions

We believe that this study will contribute to establishing the value of routinely performing multi-institutional clinical audits and will lead to improvement of radiotherapy practice at the participating centres.

Results of the IROCA international clinical audit in prostate cancer radiotherapy at six comprehensive cancer centres

To assess adherence to standard clinical practice for the diagnosis and treatment of patients undergoing prostate cancer (PCa) radiotherapy in four European countries using clinical audits as part of the international IROCA project. Multi-institutional, retrospective cohort study of 240 randomly-selected patients treated for PCa (n = 40/centre) in the year 2015 at six European hospitals. Clinical indicators applicable to general and PCa-specific radiotherapy processes were evaluated. All data were obtained directly from medical records. The audits were performed in the year 2017. Adherence to clinical protocols and practices was satisfactory, but with substantial inter-centre variability in numerous variables, as follows: staging MRI (range 27.5-87.5% of cases); presentation to multidisciplinary tumour board (2.5-100%); time elapsed between initial visit to the radiation oncology department and treatment initiation (42-102.5 days); number of treatment interruptions ≥ 1 day (7.5-97.5%). The most common deviation from standard clinical practice was inconsistent data registration, mainly failure to report data related to diagnosis, treatment, and/or adverse events. This clinical audit detected substantial inter-centre variability in adherence to standard clinical practice, most notably inconsistent record keeping. These findings confirm the value of performing clinical audits to detect deviations from standard clinical practices and procedures.

Multicentre clinical radiotherapy audit in rectal cancer: results of the IROCA project

PURPOSE

To perform a clinical audit to assess adherence to standard clinical practice for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients undergoing radiotherapy for rectal cancer treatment in four European countries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Multi-institutional, retrospective cohort study of 221 patients treated for rectal cancer in 2015 at six European cancer centres. Clinical indicators applicable to general radiotherapy processes were evaluated. All data were obtained from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

The audits were performed in the year 2017. We found substantial inter-centre variability in adherence to standard clinical practices: 1) presentation of cases at departmental clinical sessions (range, 0-100%) or multidisciplinary tumour board (50-95%); 2) pretreatment MRI (61.5-100%) and thoracoabdominal CT (15.0-100%). Large inter-centre differences were observed in the mean interval between biopsy and first visit to the radiotherapy department (range, 21.6-58.6 days) and between the first visit and start of treatment (15.1-38.8 days). Treatment interruptions ≥ 1 day occurred in 43.9% (2.5-90%) of cases overall. Treatment compensation was performed in 2.1% of cases. Treatment was completed in the prescribed time in 55.7% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

This multi-institutional clinical audit revealed that most centres adhered to standard clinical practices for most of the radiotherapy processes-related variables assessed. However, the audit revealed marked inter-centre variability for certain quality indicators, particularly inconsistent record keeping. Multiple targets for improvement and/or harmonisation were identified, confirming the value of routine clinical audits to detect potential deviations from standard clinical practice.

Improving quality of care and clinical outcomes for rectal cancer through clinical audits in a multicentre cancer care organisation

Introduction

Colorectal cancer treatment requires a complex, multidisciplinary approach. Because of the potential variability, monitoring through clinical audits is advisable. This study assesses the effects of a quality improvement action plan in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and treated with radiotherapy.

Methods

Comparative, multicentre study in two cohorts of 120 patients each, selected randomly from patients diagnosed with rectal cancer who had initiated radiotherapy with a curative intent. Based on the results from a baseline clinical audit in 2013, a quality improvement action plan was designed and implemented; a second audit in 2017 evaluated its impact.

Results

Standardised information was present on 77.5% of the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) staging reports. Treatment strategies were similar in all three study centres. Of the patients whose treatment was interrupted, just 9.7% received a compensation dose. There was an increase in MRI re-staging from 32.5 to 61.5%, and a significant decrease in unreported circumferential resection margins following neoadjuvant therapy (ypCRM), from 34.5 to 5.6% (p <  0.001).

Conclusions

The comparison between two clinical audits showed improvements in neoadjuvant radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients. Some indicators reveal areas in need of additional efforts, for example to reduce the overall treatment time.

Disparities in the management of cutaneous malignant melanoma. A population-based high-resolution study

Population-based cancer registry data from three Spanish areas were used to assess the patterns of care and adherence to guidelines for cutaneous malignant melanoma. We included 934 cases diagnosed in 2009-2013. Completeness of the pathology reports, imaging for detecting distant metastasis and the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) were analysed. The proportion of pathology reports that mentioned the essential pathological features required for T staging was 93%, ranging across geographic areas from 81% to 98% (p < 0.001). The percentage of low-risk patients who underwent no imaging studies, as proposed by guidelines, or only chest imaging ranged among areas from 0.6% to 84% (p < 0.001). Of the patients with clinically node-negative melanoma >1 mm thick and no distant metastases, 68% underwent SLNB, varying by area from 61% to 78% (p = 0.017). This study revealed wide geographic variation in different aspects of melanoma care. The use of a standardised structured pathology report could strengthen the completeness of reporting. Improvement strategies should also include efforts to reduce overuse of imaging in low-risk patients and to increase the adherence to guidelines recommendations on the use of SLNB.