OVARIAN CANCER and US: compliance

Blog Archives: Nov 2004 - present

#ovariancancers



Special items: Ovarian Cancer and Us blog best viewed in Firefox

Search This Blog

Showing posts with label compliance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label compliance. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

abstract: Presence of key findings in the medical record prior to a documented high-risk diagnosis.



Presence of key findings in the medical record prior to a documented high-risk diagnosis.


Abstract

Background
Failure or delay in diagnosis is a common preventable source of error. The authors sought to determine the frequency with which high-information clinical findings (HIFs) suggestive of a high-risk diagnosis (HRD) appear in the medical record before HRD documentation.
  
Methods
A knowledge base from a diagnostic decision support system was used to identify HIFs for selected HRDs: lumbar disc disease, myocardial infarction, appendicitis, and colon, breast, lung, ovarian and bladder carcinomas. Two physicians reviewed at least 20 patient records retrieved from a research patient data registry for each of these eight HRDs and for age- and gender-compatible controls. Records were searched for HIFs in visit notes that were created before the HRD was established in the electronic record and in general medical visit notes for controls.

Results
25% of records reviewed (61/243) contained HIFs in notes before the HRD was established. The mean duration between HIFs first occurring in the record and time of diagnosis ranged from 19 days for breast cancer to 2 years for bladder cancer. In three of the eight HRDs, HIFs were much less likely in control patients without the HRD.
  
Conclusions
In many records of patients with an HRD, HIFs were present before the HRD was established. Reasons for delay include non-compliance with recommended follow-up, unusual presentation of a disease, and system errors (eg, lack of laboratory follow-up). The presence of HIFs in clinical records suggests a potential role for the integration of diagnostic decision support into the clinical workflow to provide reminder alerts to improve the diagnostic focus.


Thursday, March 08, 2012

Re-operation outcome in patients referred to a gynecologic oncology center with presumed ovarian cancer FIGO I-IIIA after sub-standard initial surgery



Re-operation outcome in patients referred to a gynecologic oncology center with presumed ovarian cancer FIGO I-IIIA after sub-standard initial surgery:

Publication year: 2012

Background 
Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for early ovarian cancer both as therapeutic and comprehensive staging. Only the latter allows appropriate tailoring of systemic treatment. However, the compliance with guidelines for comprehensive staging has been reported to be only moderate and, therefore, re-staging procedures are commonly indicated to avoid undertreatment. The purpose of our study was to evaluate re-operation in a tertiary gynecologic oncology unit after primary operation for presumably ovarian cancer FIGO I-IIIA in general gynecology departments.

Material and methods 
Forty consecutive patients after primary surgery in the outside institutions for presumed early ovarian cancer with assumed tumor spread limited to the pelvis (FIGO I-IIIA) admitted to our department between 1999 and 2007 were included. In 35 cases re-staging surgery in our unit was indicated. The intra- and post-operative results were compared with initial diagnosis and sites of undetected disease were evaluated. Reasons for re-staging and referral pattern were studied. Results 40 patients were enrolled of whom 53% came by self-referral. Only 18% were referred by the primary surgeon and the remaining patients were referred by their home gynecologist. Only 5 patients (13%) were classified as having had a comprehensive staging by surgical records and pathology reports and 35 patients underwent comprehensive re-staging laparotomy after which 20 patients (50%) experienced an upstaging including 13 patients with final diagnosis of FIGO stage IIIC. Most frequent sites of primarily undetected tumor were peritoneum (pelvic 34%, diaphragm 13%, paracolic 8%), lymph nodes (para aortic 32%, pelvic 11%), intestines 24%, and residual omental tissue 18%. The indication for post-operative chemotherapy was modified in 53% of patients.

Conclusion
Comprehensive staging of presumed early ovarian cancer has been described as major problem especially outside gynecologic oncology units. Re-staging results in our department confirmed this deficiency by showing a considerable proportion of upstaging associated with alterations of recommendations for systemic treatment. However, series like this may even underestimate the problem, because incomplete staging is unfortunately accompanied by non-systematic referral practices not reflecting staging quality.