CSQI 2013 report - Cancer Quality Council of Ontario, Canada

 Blogger's Note: the full report is extensive but searchable according to numerous quality indices including patient satisfaction, some areas include ovarian cancer specifics (eg. stats...)


CSQI 2013

Cancer System Quality Index (CSQI) 2013

Safe		Fair, but more work needs to be done. Some processes for a safe cancer system are in place, and action is under way to address concerns. Better system measures are needed to understand complications of care, across all aspects of cancer treatment and from the patient’s perspective.
Effective		Very good. Cancer services are generally effective and evidence based, and more Ontarians are receiving treatment based on the best available evidence. Continued effort is required to achieve targets and consistency across regions.
Accessible		Very good. More Ontarians are accessing the services they need despite increases in demand. A focus on patient-centred waits is required.
Responsive		Good, but the cancer system requires more focus on patients’ and survivors’ quality of life, and consideration of the whole person and family, both during and after active treatment.
Equitable		Poor. Cancer burden is still higher among those with lower socioeconomic status. Some variation exists in the use of guidelines for patients over 70 years old. More work needs to be done, using a whole-of-society approach to ensure equity.
Integrated		Poor. Services across the system need to be coordinated to support seamless and effective patient transitions regardless of location or provider.
Efficient		Fair. Better measures are needed to determine value for money for all services, while maintaining good health outcomes and seamless patient care. Use of acute care hospital services at the end of life remains high, suggesting patients and families may not have adequate access to appropriate resources and supports.

*

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

Incomplete Data

^* These symbols provide an overall assessment of cancer system performance for each dimension of quality. They include at an aggregate level, an assessment of performance over time, performance against annual programmatic targets, jurisdictional comparisons and/or clinical aims for those measures available in the index. Breadth and depth of indicators across the patient continuum and type of indicator are taken into account in the assessment.