1st phase vs. 2nd phase Eligible patients identified: 87 vs. 118 The average waiting for an Oncology OPD was 67.4 days (SD:8.3 d) vs. 44.5 d. (SD:10.1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CCM Demonstrators – Deliverables, Evidence and Mainstreaming National CCM Cop April 22 nd 2010 Roger Richards, Mark Kingston High Impact Change - Approach.
Advertisements

Ideal Practice Workflow Revenue Maximization and Cost Efficiency Contact us : 2222 Morris Ave. 2nd Floor, Union, NJ Ph: (908)
Transfer from primary to secondary school September 2014 Secondary School Admissions 2014.
 Meeting the needs of cancer survivors across the lifespan Norton Cancer Institute Survivorship Program Christy Roberts, RN, BSN, OCN.
Sarcoma cancer patient pathways Why do sarcoma cancer patients breach cancer waiting time targets?
Subjects eligible for this study were post treatment, disease free head and neck cancer patients undergoing routine follow-up visits for surveillance.
CNS: Malignant Glioma Patient Pathway Project Kerry Mackenzie, Project Officer, WCMICS, Victoria; Dr Kate Drummond, Neurosurgeon, Project.
March 2002 Outcomes in thyroid cancer: what factors are important? Information Projects Team Outcomes in thyroid cancer: what factors are important? NYCRIS.
Trust Cancer Lead Clinician
Taxanes for Ovarian Cancer: Progress Report Rosemary Tate Information Projects Team December 2000.
The Health Roundtable 3-3b_HRT1215-Session_MILLNER_CARRUCAN_WOOD_ADHB_NZ Orthopaedic Service Excellence – Implementing Management Operating Systems Presenter:
S Strong 1,2, NS Blencowe 1,2,T Fox 1, C Reid 3, T Crosby 4, H.Ford 5, J M Blazeby 1,2 1 School of Social and Community Medicine, Canynge Hall, University.
Background The 2 week wait referral system was designed to expedite the referral of patients, suspected to have cancer, from Primary to Secondary care.
Rush Enhanced Discharge Planning Program: A Model for Interdisciplinary Care Coordination Robyn L. Golden, LCSW Director, Older Adult Programs Rush University.
The National Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction Audit Key findings of the Third Annual Report Slides produced by the MBR Project Team. © The National.
1.Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The Green Top Guidelines Number 21: The management of tubal pregnancy. (Online). Available from:
A one year audit of achieving patient driven performance targets in a locally provided memory clinic Dr C Crowe, St Patrick’s Hospital, Cashel & St Michael’s.
Reviewed process for follow up appointments for interpreters Review of information for patients regarding financial process & appointment letters for private.
Breast cancer patient pathway
Jerry M. Maniate, MD, M.Ed, FRCPC Section of Haematology / Oncology, Department of Medicine St. Joseph’s Health Centre (Toronto) Assistant Professor, Faculty.
Survivorship Update January 2015 The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust James Owen Senior Cancer Services Manager.
Introducing outcome measures for palliative care in a hospice setting Mary Denholm (CMT1) Tabitha Thomas (Consultant) Arthur Rank House Hospice June 2015.
Overview of operational research in MSF Myriam Henkens, MD, MPH International Medical Coordinator MSF London 1st of June, 2006.
Organized Diagnostic Assessment Demonstration Projects Organized Diagnostic Assessment Demonstration Projects Grand River Regional Diagnostic Assessment.
JCUH NICE MSCC Guidelines Compliance audit Ruth Mhlanga Senior Specialist Physiotherapist Oncology and Haematology.
... for our health Wisconsin Research and Education Network and the University of Wisconsin Department of Family Medicine Collaboration Among Pharmacists.
Implementing universal Lynch Syndrome screening in a large healthcare system.
Improving the quality of medical and surgical care NCEPOD SEPSIS STUDY.
NHS Cervical Screening Programme, England, : Graphs.
1 Recent trends in colorectal cancer in Norway: incidence, management and outcomes Arne Wibe, MD, PhD Professor of Surgery St. Olavs Hospital Trondheim,
1 Cervical Screening Programme, England, : Graphs.
The Anticoagulation Service at Salisbury District Hospital Nic McQuaid And Rachel Woodford Anticoagulation Nurse Practitioners.
Is it possible to improve the elective surgery waitlist framework in a sub regional health service? Presenter: Peter Simpson-White Elective Surgery Coordinator.
Behavioral Health Integration
Staff Training. MOQC/MCC Tobacco Cessation Patient Education Video: Why Cancer Patients Should Quit Tobacco.
Gynaecology MDT Coordinator
Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Audit results for NAOG meeting 19 April 2013 The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.
Evaluation Plan Steven Clauser, PhD Chief, Outcomes Research Branch Applied Research Program Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences NCCCP Launch.
Other Performance Standards A&E:- A&E performance against the 4 hour standard improved in March and the Trust achieved 97.8%. Year to date overall performance.
NET Registry in Greece Dr Kalliopi Pazaitou-Panayiotou, MD, PhD Departement of Endocrinology-Endocrine Oncology Theagenion Cancer Hospital Thessaloniki,
Can a Clinical Assessment Service (CAS) for routine adult Gastroenterology referrals provide a clinically safe, sustainable, more efficient service that.
French Guidelines (SOR): Any Impact Since 1995? BN Bui Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux FSG CETOS 2005.
Cheshire & Merseyside Bowel Cancer Screening Programme April 2008.
Specialist Breast Units – Does it improve Breast Cancer care? These Power Point presentations are free to download only for academic purposes, with due.
Research into Practice Audiology Chemotherapy Ototoxicity Project.
The One Stop Head and Neck Lump Clinic David Courtney Consultant Maxillofacial Surgeon Derriford Hospital, Plymouth.
Depression in children and young people referred to Specialist CAMHS: An audit of screening procedures. Dr. Michelle Rydon-Grange Clinical Psychologist,
JUST GIVE IT: a 2 phase study to audit the Immediate Management of Patients with Proven or Suspected Neutropenic Sepsis by Ally Gruber Acute Oncology Clinical.
Improving Patient Flow Using Groups SYDNEE SWAN, O.T. REG. (MB) JENNIFER PHILLIPS, O.T. REG. (MB) GARY ALTMAN M.D.
Council of Governors Meeting Tim Bennett – Director of Finance and Steven Vaughan – Director of Operations &Performance July 2011.
Contact: Patrick Phillips,
2016/17 Q1 Performance Scorecard - DRAFT
Improving Access to Specialized Services in Québec : Assessment and Outlook (Elective Surgery) Dr Michel Bureau.
Title of the Change Project
2015/16 Q4 Performance Scorecard - DRAFT
QI Session 3 Plan, Do, Study, Act
BREAST CANCER ONCOLOGY NAVIGATION SERVICE
Coordination (benign lesions)
Clinical Leadership Decision Process
Integration of Primary and Secondary Care Cardiology
Y W Liao1, S Shaman1, C S Chean1, S S Poon1, A Soltan1
Segmented analysis of prostate cancer pathway from referral to treatment: This work was carried out in partnership between the Transforming.
Introduction Where did it come from? Started approximately 5 years ago
Proposal for Brain and CNS Presentation Audit Potential retrospective audit to understand the different routes into the neuro-onc service.
Lisa McNally Mojtaba Dorri
The BAHNO Head & Neck Cancer Surveillance Audit 2018
Results from the first National Lung Cancer Organisational Audit.
The BAHNO Head & Neck Cancer Surveillance Audit 2018
2018 National Mesothelioma Audit
28 Day Faster Diagnosis Standard
Presentation transcript:

1st phase vs. 2nd phase Eligible patients identified: 87 vs. 118 The average waiting for an Oncology OPD was 67.4 days (SD:8.3 d) vs d. (SD:10.1 d) The waiting time for an Oncology OPD decreased by 34% (67.4 d. vs d.) Subgroup analysis showed DOO-MDT date: 28% decrease(24.7 vs.17.8 d.) MDT date-Ref. Letter dictated: 73.3.% decrease (10.5 vs. 2.8 d.) Reference letter dictated - Oncology OPD date: 33.6% decrease (32.1 vs d.) Christakis I. MD FRCS PhD, Qureshi Y. MD, MRCS, Poch L. MD PhD, Depala A. BSc, Abdel-Aziz T. FRCS PhD, Kurzawinski T. FRCS PhD University College London Hospital United Kingdom The implementation of a database in a General Surgery Department decreases the waiting time for a post-operative oncology appointment by 34% Christakis I., Qureshi Y., Poch L., Depala A., Abdel-Aziz T., Kurzawinski T Theatre diary used to identify patients. Patients with a histopathological diagnosis of malignancy identified. 1st part of the audit 1st of June st of October 2013 (5 months) 2nd part of the study 1st of June th of September 2014 (3 months) An MDT database was created and maintained by clinicians exclusively keeping track of all actions involved in the MDT Patients with malignancy require discussion in the relevant Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) Meeting and may require referral to an Oncology Service for further treatment. The referral process in our hospital so far is the following: 1.Incidental finding of malignancy or known malignancy 2.1st OPD 2 weeks after surgery, patient is informed about it 3. and referral to MDT is decided 4.MDT discussion and referral to Oncologist if needed 5.2nd OPD, MDT decision isa communicated to the patient 6.Patient seen by Oncologist The use of a database can help reduce the waiting time for an Oncology appointment thus helping Institutions meet target points and avoiding financial penalties. To our experience, it can easily be maintained by clinicians thus avoiding the need for a dedicated coordinator that incurs financial burden to the Department and is not always available..It can potentially decrease the anxiety of patients waiting to receive cancer treatment by ensuring quicker appointments but this remains to be evaluated in a prospective study. Methods and Procedures Conclusions Background and Objectives Results

Background and Objectives Patients with malignancy require discussion in the relevant Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) Meeting and may require referral to an Oncology Service for further treatment. The referral process in our hospital so far is the following: 1.Incidental finding of malignancy or known malignancy 2.1st OPD 2 weeks after surgery, patient is informed about it and referral to MDT is decided 3.MDT discussion and referral to Oncologist if needed 4.2nd OPD, MDT decision isa communicated to the patient 5.Patient seen by Oncologist Study Goals Target population: Patients with malignancy (known preoperatively or discovered incidentally) Primary Outcome: Measure the overall amount of time from the day of the operation (DOO) until the first oncology consultation Evaluate if the use of the database can decrease the overall waiting time Secondary outcome: Identify which factor contributes most: MDT date, referral letter dictation The implementation of a database in a General Surgery Department decreases the waiting time for a post-operative oncology appointment by 34%, Ioannis Christakis

Methods and Procedure Methodology Theatre diary used to identify eligible patients. Patients with a histopathological diagnosis of malignancy identified. Electronic records and paper notes screened to evaluate the exact dates of appointments. Duration of study 1 st part of the study 1 st of June st of October 2013 (5 months) An MDT database was created and maintained by clinicians exclusively keeping track of all actions involved in the MDT 2 nd part of the study 1 st of June th of September 2014 (3 months) The implementation of a database in a General Surgery Department decreases the waiting time for a post-operative oncology appointment by 34%, Ioannis Christakis

Results and Conclusion 1 st phase of study 87 eligible patients identified- 8 patients with malignancy The average waiting for an Onc. OPD was 67.4 days (SD:8.3 d) The average time between: 1.DOO to MDT:24.7 d. 2.MDT to Referral letter dictated: 10.5 d. 3.Referral letter dictated to Oncology OPD: 32.1 d. 2nd phase of study 118 eligible patients identified- 6 patients with malignancy The average waiting for an Onc. OPD was 44.5 d. (SD:10.1 d) The average time between: 1.DOO to MDT:17.8 d. 2.MDT to Referral letter dictated: 2.8 d. 3.Referral letter dictated to Oncology OPD: 21.3 d. The implementation of a database in a General Surgery Department decreases the waiting time for a post-operative oncology appointment by 34%, Ioannis Christakis Results The waiting time for an Onc.OPD decreased by 34% (67.4 d. vs d.) Subgroup analysis showed DOO-MDT date: 28% decrease(24.7 vs.17.8 d.) MDT date-Ref. Letter dictated: 73.3.% decrease (10.5 vs. 2.8 d.) Ref.Letter dictated-Onc.OPD date: 33.6% decrease (32.1 vs d.) Conclusions The use of a database can help reduce the waiting time for an Oncology appointment thus helping Institutions meet target points and avoiding financial penalties. To our experience, it can easily be maintained by clinicians thus avoiding the need for a dedicated coordinator that incurs financial burden to the Department and is not always available. It can potentially decrease the anxiety of patients waiting to receive cancer treatment by ensuring quicker appointments but this remains to be evaluated in a prospective study.

Disclosure No conflicts to declare from any of the authors The implementation of a database in a General Surgery Department decreases the waiting time for a post-operative oncology appointment by 34%, Ioannis Christakis