Development of consensus quality indicators for cancer supportive care: a Delphi study and pilot testing

Hyatt, A; Gough, K; Chung, H; Wood, W; Aston, R; Cockwill, J; Galetakis, S; Krishnasamy, M

Author(s): Hyatt, A; Gough, K; Chung, H; Wood, W; Aston, R; Cockwill, J; Galetakis, S; Krishnasamy, M;
Details: Publication Year 2024-03-27,Volume 24,Issue #1,Page 377
Journal Title: BMC Health Services Research
Publication Type: Research article
Abstract: BACKGROUND: High quality supportive care is fundamental to achieve optimal health outcomes for people affected by cancer. Use of quality indicators provides comparative information for monitoring, management, and improvement of care within and across healthcare systems. The aim of this Australian study was to develop and test a minimum viable set of cancer supportive care quality indicators that would be feasible to implement and generate usable data for policy and practice. METHODS: A two-round, modified reactive Delphi process was employed firstto develop the proposed indicators. Participants with expertise in cancer control in Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada rated their level of agreement on a 7-point Likert scale against criteria assessing the importance, feasibility, and usability of proposed indicators. Relative response frequencies were assessed against pre-specified consensus criteria and a ranking exercise, which delivered the list of proposed indicators. Draft indicators were then presented to a purposive sample of clinicial and health management staff via qualitative interviews at two acute care settings in Melbourne, Australia for feedback regarding feasibility. Desktop audits of online published health service policy and practice descriptions were also conducted at participating acute care settings to confirm health service data availability and feasibility of collection to report against proposed indicators. RESULTS: Sixteen quality indicators associated with the delivery of quality cancer supportive care in Australian acute healthcare settings met pre-specified criteria for inclusion. Indicators deemed 'necessary' were mapped and ranked across five key categories: Screening, Referrals, Data Management, Communication and Training, and Culturally Safe and Accessible Care. Testing confirmed indicators were viewed as feasible by clinical and health management staff, and desktop audits could provide a fast and reasonably effective method to assess general adherence and performance. CONCLUSIONS: The development of quality indicators specific to cancer supportive care provides a strong framework for measurement and monitoring, service improvement, and practice change with the potential to improve health outcomes for people affected by cancer. Evaluation of implementation feasibility of these expert consensus generated quality indicators is recommended.
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Humans; *Quality Indicators, Health Care; Consensus; Delphi Technique; Australia; *Neoplasms/therapy; Cancer supportive care; Delphi; Oncology; Quality indicators; indicator development
Department(s): Health Services Research
Publisher's Version: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10876-6
Terms of Use/Rights Notice: Refer to copyright notice on published article.

Creation Date: 2024-04-02 04:06:05

Last Modified: 2024-04-02 04:14:45