Objectives
As workload increases, surgical care for patients with bone metastases is increasingly decentralised, with a shift in management away from primary bone tumour units to local centres. We must ensure that patients have similar outcomes regardless of where they receive their treatment. The aim was to develop and validate a set of quality outcome indicators (QOIs) to evaluate treatment success for patients undergoing surgery for bone metastases.
Methods
Outcome recommendations were adapted from the literature and field tested in a retrospective patient cohort to determine feasibility. The provisional outcome indicators were assessed during a modified RAND/Delphi consensus process by a group of patients, relatives and healthcare professionals with validated targets added.
Results
1534 articles were reviewed. 38 quality objectives were extracted and assessed for feasibility using clinical records for 117 patients. 28 provisional outcome indicators proceeded to expert consensus and were reviewed by a group of 22 panellists including 10 patients and 4 relatives/carers. After two rounds, 15 QOIs were generated, with validated targets based on expert consensus. These included specific statements such as ‘surgery improves pain and reduces the need for morphine, target: at follow-up, pain is documented in 80% of individuals and 50% of these have reduced need for morphine’.
Conclusions
The published evidence and guidelines were adapted into a set of outcome indicators validated by patients, their family/carers and healthcare professionals. These can be used to compare care between centres and identify units of excellence in maximising good outcome after surgery for bone metastases.
Samantha Downie, Hasnain Chohan, Lauren Ross, Conor McCann, Peter Hall, Alison Stillie, Matthew Moran, Cathie Sudlow and A Hamish RW Simpson
Disease Category: Cancer
Disease Name: Bone metastases
Age Range: Unknown
Sex: Either
Nature of Intervention: Surgery
- Clinical experts
- Consumers (caregivers)
- Consumers (patients)
- Families
- Core indicator set
- Delphi process
- Systematic review
Outcome recommendations were adapted from the literature and field tested in a retrospective patient cohort to determine feasibility. The provisional outcome indicators were assessed during a modified RAND/Delphi consensus process by a group of patients, relatives and healthcare professionals with validated targets added.