A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Choosing Wisely in Oncology: Are We Ready For Value-Based Care? | LitMetric

Choosing Wisely in Oncology: Are We Ready For Value-Based Care?

J Oncol Pract

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; Stanford University Cancer Institute, Stanford; UCLA/Veterans Affairs, Los Angeles, CA; University of Miami, Miami; University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; ASCO, Alexandria, VA; MD Anderson Cancer Center at Cooper, Voorhees Township, NJ; and University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.

Published: November 2017

Introduction: In 2012, ASCO created the Top Five Choosing Wisely (CW) list of low-value tests and procedures for which there is little evidence of benefit. ASCO's Quality Oncology Practice Initiative, an oncologist-led practice-based quality assessment program, includes measures on the basis of these recommendations.

Methods: CW test measures from spring and fall 2013, spring 2014, and spring 2015 were evaluated for concordance rates, change in the concordance over time, and variability by practice characteristics. Practice characteristics recorded included geographic location, academic affiliation, number of new cases, number of medical oncologists, and rounds of participation in Quality Oncology Practice Initiative. Medians, interquartile ranges, and percentages were calculated for concordance with recommendations and practice characteristics. Change in recommendation concordance over time was assessed using linear regression models.

Results: From 2013 to 2015, 341 unique oncology practices abstracted the CW measures. Performance varied for specific recommendations. The median concordance was best for measure 1 (patients with low or undocumented performance status who received chemotherapy), where concordance ranged from 78.4% to 83.3%. The lowest concordance was for measure 3 (use of biomarkers or advanced imaging tests for surveillance in early breast cancer), where concordance ranged from 67.7% to 74.2%. Performance on CW measures varied markedly by individual practice. Variability over time and by practice characteristics was observed.

Conclusion: Performance on ASCO's CW demonstrates room for improvement. Concordance rates varied substantially by practice. Further education on CW measures is needed to improve patient care and enhance value.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JOP.2016.019281DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

practice characteristics
16
concordance
9
choosing wisely
8
quality oncology
8
practice
8
oncology practice
8
practice initiative
8
concordance rates
8
concordance time
8
concordance ranged
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!