Search

Contains fulltext : 177731.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: Complex surgical procedures such as esophagectomy and gastrectomy for cancer are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in postoperative morbidity, mortality, and associated failure-to-rescue (FTR), in patients who underwent a potentially curative resection for esophageal or gastric cancer in the Netherlands, and to investigate differences between the two groups. METHODS: All patients with esophageal or gastric cancer who underwent a potentially curative resection, registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA) between 2011 and 2014, were included. Primary outcomes were (major) postoperative complications, postoperative mortality and FTR. To investigate groups' effect on the outcomes of interest a mixed model was used. RESULTS: Overall, 2644 patients with esophageal cancer and 1584 patients with gastric cancer were included in this study. In patients with gastric cancer, postoperative mortality (7.7% in 2011 vs. 3.8% in 2014) and FTR (38% in 2011 and 19% in 2014) decreased significantly over the years. The adjusted risk of developing a major postoperative complication was lower (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.42-0.70), but the risk of FTR was higher (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.05-3.27) in patients with gastric cancer compared to patients with esophageal cancer. CONCLUSION: Once a postoperative complication occurred, patients with gastric cancer were more likely to die compared to patients with esophageal cancer. Underlying mechanisms like patient selection, and differences in structure and organization of care should be investigated. Next to morbidity and mortality, failure-to-rescue should be considered as an important outcome measure after esophagogastric cancer resections.

Contains fulltext : 177731.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: Complex surgical procedures such as esophagectomy and gastrectomy for cancer are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in postoperative morbidity, mortality, and associated failure-to-rescue (FTR), in patients who underwent a potentially curative resection for esophageal or gastric cancer in the Netherlands, and to investigate differences between the two groups. METHODS: All patients with esophageal or gastric cancer who underwent a potentially curative resection, registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA) between 2011 and 2014, were included. Primary outcomes were (major) postoperative complications, postoperative mortality and FTR. To investigate groups' effect on the outcomes of interest a mixed model was used. RESULTS: Overall, 2644 patients with esophageal cancer and 1584 patients with gastric cancer were included in this study. In patients with gastric cancer, postoperative mortality (7.7% in 2011 vs. 3.8% in 2014) and FTR (38% in 2011 and 19% in 2014) decreased significantly over the years. The adjusted risk of developing a major postoperative complication was lower (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.42-0.70), but the risk of FTR was higher (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.05-3.27) in patients with gastric cancer compared to patients with esophageal cancer. CONCLUSION: Once a postoperative complication occurred, patients with gastric cancer were more likely to die compared to patients with esophageal cancer. Underlying mechanisms like patient selection, and differences in structure and organization of care should be investigated. Next to morbidity and mortality, failure-to-rescue should be considered as an important outcome measure after esophagogastric cancer resections.

Contains fulltext : 172392.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: In 2011, the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) group began nationwide registration of all patients undergoing surgery with the intention of resection for oesophageal or gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to describe the initiation and implementation of this process along with an overview of the results. METHODS: The DUCA is part of the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing. The audit provides (surgical) teams with reliable, weekly updated, benchmarked information on process and (case mix-adjusted) outcome measures. To accomplish this, a web-based registration was designed, based on a set of predefined quality measures. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2014, a total of 2786 patients with oesophageal cancer and 1887 with gastric cancer were registered. Case ascertainment approached 100 per cent for patients registered in 2013. The percentage of patients with oesophageal cancer starting treatment within 5 weeks of diagnosis increased significantly over time from 32.5 per cent in 2011 to 41.0 per cent in 2014 (P < 0.001). The percentage of patients with a minimum of 15 examined lymph nodes in the resected specimen also increased significantly for both oesophageal cancer (from 50.3 per cent in 2011 to 73.0 per cent in 2014; P < 0.001) and gastric cancer (from 47.5 per cent in 2011 to 73.6 per cent in 2014; P < 0.001). Postoperative mortality remained stable (around 4.0 per cent) for patients with oesophageal cancer, and decreased for patients with gastric cancer (from 8.0 per cent in 2011 to 4.0 per cent in 2014; P = 0.031). CONCLUSION: Nationwide implementation of the DUCA has been successful. The results indicate a positive trend for various process and outcome measures.

Contains fulltext : 172392.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: In 2011, the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) group began nationwide registration of all patients undergoing surgery with the intention of resection for oesophageal or gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to describe the initiation and implementation of this process along with an overview of the results. METHODS: The DUCA is part of the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing. The audit provides (surgical) teams with reliable, weekly updated, benchmarked information on process and (case mix-adjusted) outcome measures. To accomplish this, a web-based registration was designed, based on a set of predefined quality measures. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2014, a total of 2786 patients with oesophageal cancer and 1887 with gastric cancer were registered. Case ascertainment approached 100 per cent for patients registered in 2013. The percentage of patients with oesophageal cancer starting treatment within 5 weeks of diagnosis increased significantly over time from 32.5 per cent in 2011 to 41.0 per cent in 2014 (P < 0.001). The percentage of patients with a minimum of 15 examined lymph nodes in the resected specimen also increased significantly for both oesophageal cancer (from 50.3 per cent in 2011 to 73.0 per cent in 2014; P < 0.001) and gastric cancer (from 47.5 per cent in 2011 to 73.6 per cent in 2014; P < 0.001). Postoperative mortality remained stable (around 4.0 per cent) for patients with oesophageal cancer, and decreased for patients with gastric cancer (from 8.0 per cent in 2011 to 4.0 per cent in 2014; P = 0.031). CONCLUSION: Nationwide implementation of the DUCA has been successful. The results indicate a positive trend for various process and outcome measures.

Contains fulltext : 172392.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: In 2011, the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) group began nationwide registration of all patients undergoing surgery with the intention of resection for oesophageal or gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to describe the initiation and implementation of this process along with an overview of the results. METHODS: The DUCA is part of the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing. The audit provides (surgical) teams with reliable, weekly updated, benchmarked information on process and (case mix-adjusted) outcome measures. To accomplish this, a web-based registration was designed, based on a set of predefined quality measures. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2014, a total of 2786 patients with oesophageal cancer and 1887 with gastric cancer were registered. Case ascertainment approached 100 per cent for patients registered in 2013. The percentage of patients with oesophageal cancer starting treatment within 5 weeks of diagnosis increased significantly over time from 32.5 per cent in 2011 to 41.0 per cent in 2014 (P < 0.001). The percentage of patients with a minimum of 15 examined lymph nodes in the resected specimen also increased significantly for both oesophageal cancer (from 50.3 per cent in 2011 to 73.0 per cent in 2014; P < 0.001) and gastric cancer (from 47.5 per cent in 2011 to 73.6 per cent in 2014; P < 0.001). Postoperative mortality remained stable (around 4.0 per cent) for patients with oesophageal cancer, and decreased for patients with gastric cancer (from 8.0 per cent in 2011 to 4.0 per cent in 2014; P = 0.031). CONCLUSION: Nationwide implementation of the DUCA has been successful. The results indicate a positive trend for various process and outcome measures.

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 160940.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), INTRODUCTION: In 2009, the nationwide Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit (DSCA) was initiated by the Association of Surgeons of the Netherlands (ASN) to monitor, evaluate and improve colorectal cancer care. The DSCA is currently widely used as a blueprint for the initiation of other audits, coordinated by the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA). This article illustrates key elements of the DSCA and results of three years of auditing. METHODS: Key elements include: a leading role of the professional association with integration of the audit in the national quality assurance policy; web-based registration by medical specialists; weekly updated online feedback to participants; annual external data verification with other data sources; improvement projects. RESULTS: In two years, all Dutch hospitals participated in the audit. Case-ascertainment was 92% in 2010 and 95% in 2011. External data verification by comparison with the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) showed high concordance of data items. Within three years, guideline compliance for diagnostics, preoperative multidisciplinary meetings and standardised reporting increased; complication-, re-intervention and postoperative mortality rates decreased significantly. DISCUSSION: The success of the DSCA is the result of effective surgical collaboration. The leading role of the ASN in conducting the audit resulted in full participation of all colorectal surgeons in the Netherlands. By integrating the audit into the ASNs' quality assurance policy, it could be used to set national quality standards. Future challenges include reduction of administrative burden; expansion to a multidisciplinary registration; and addition of financial information and patient reported outcomes to the audit data.

Contains fulltext : 160940.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), INTRODUCTION: In 2009, the nationwide Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit (DSCA) was initiated by the Association of Surgeons of the Netherlands (ASN) to monitor, evaluate and improve colorectal cancer care. The DSCA is currently widely used as a blueprint for the initiation of other audits, coordinated by the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA). This article illustrates key elements of the DSCA and results of three years of auditing. METHODS: Key elements include: a leading role of the professional association with integration of the audit in the national quality assurance policy; web-based registration by medical specialists; weekly updated online feedback to participants; annual external data verification with other data sources; improvement projects. RESULTS: In two years, all Dutch hospitals participated in the audit. Case-ascertainment was 92% in 2010 and 95% in 2011. External data verification by comparison with the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) showed high concordance of data items. Within three years, guideline compliance for diagnostics, preoperative multidisciplinary meetings and standardised reporting increased; complication-, re-intervention and postoperative mortality rates decreased significantly. DISCUSSION: The success of the DSCA is the result of effective surgical collaboration. The leading role of the ASN in conducting the audit resulted in full participation of all colorectal surgeons in the Netherlands. By integrating the audit into the ASNs' quality assurance policy, it could be used to set national quality standards. Future challenges include reduction of administrative burden; expansion to a multidisciplinary registration; and addition of financial information and patient reported outcomes to the audit data.

Contains fulltext : 160940.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), INTRODUCTION: In 2009, the nationwide Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit (DSCA) was initiated by the Association of Surgeons of the Netherlands (ASN) to monitor, evaluate and improve colorectal cancer care. The DSCA is currently widely used as a blueprint for the initiation of other audits, coordinated by the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA). This article illustrates key elements of the DSCA and results of three years of auditing. METHODS: Key elements include: a leading role of the professional association with integration of the audit in the national quality assurance policy; web-based registration by medical specialists; weekly updated online feedback to participants; annual external data verification with other data sources; improvement projects. RESULTS: In two years, all Dutch hospitals participated in the audit. Case-ascertainment was 92% in 2010 and 95% in 2011. External data verification by comparison with the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) showed high concordance of data items. Within three years, guideline compliance for diagnostics, preoperative multidisciplinary meetings and standardised reporting increased; complication-, re-intervention and postoperative mortality rates decreased significantly. DISCUSSION: The success of the DSCA is the result of effective surgical collaboration. The leading role of the ASN in conducting the audit resulted in full participation of all colorectal surgeons in the Netherlands. By integrating the audit into the ASNs' quality assurance policy, it could be used to set national quality standards. Future challenges include reduction of administrative burden; expansion to a multidisciplinary registration; and addition of financial information and patient reported outcomes to the audit data.

Contains fulltext : 160940.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), INTRODUCTION: In 2009, the nationwide Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit (DSCA) was initiated by the Association of Surgeons of the Netherlands (ASN) to monitor, evaluate and improve colorectal cancer care. The DSCA is currently widely used as a blueprint for the initiation of other audits, coordinated by the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA). This article illustrates key elements of the DSCA and results of three years of auditing. METHODS: Key elements include: a leading role of the professional association with integration of the audit in the national quality assurance policy; web-based registration by medical specialists; weekly updated online feedback to participants; annual external data verification with other data sources; improvement projects. RESULTS: In two years, all Dutch hospitals participated in the audit. Case-ascertainment was 92% in 2010 and 95% in 2011. External data verification by comparison with the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) showed high concordance of data items. Within three years, guideline compliance for diagnostics, preoperative multidisciplinary meetings and standardised reporting increased; complication-, re-intervention and postoperative mortality rates decreased significantly. DISCUSSION: The success of the DSCA is the result of effective surgical collaboration. The leading role of the ASN in conducting the audit resulted in full participation of all colorectal surgeons in the Netherlands. By integrating the audit into the ASNs' quality assurance policy, it could be used to set national quality standards. Future challenges include reduction of administrative burden; expansion to a multidisciplinary registration; and addition of financial information and patient reported outcomes to the audit data.