Sarah Bobiak

Appreciative Inquiry for quality improvement in primary care practices.

Purpose: To test the effect of an Appreciative Inquiry (AI) quality improvement strategy on clinical quality management and practice development outcomes. Appreciative inquiry enables the discovery of shared motivations, envisioning a transformed future, and learning around the implementation of a change process. Methods: Thirty diverse primary care practices were randomly assigned to receive an AI-based intervention focused on a practice-chosen topic and on improving preventive service delivery (PSD) rates. Medical-record review assessed change in PSD rates. Ethnographic field notes and observational checklist analysis used editing and immersion/crystallization methods to identify factors affecting intervention implementation and practice development outcomes. Results: The PSD rates did not change. Field note analysis suggested that the intervention elicited core motivations, facilitated development of a shared vision, defined change objectives, and fostered respectful interactions. Practices most likely to implement the intervention or develop new practice capacities exhibited 1 or more of the following: support from key leader(s), a sense of urgency for change, a mission focused on serving patients, health care system and practice flexibility, and a history of constructive practice change. Conclusions: An AI approach and enabling practice conditions can lead to intervention implementation and practice development by connecting individual and practice strengths and motivations to the change objective.

Variation in Definitive Therapy for Localized Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Among National Comprehensive Cancer Network Institutions

PURPOSE This study determined practice patterns in the staging and treatment of patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) among National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) member institutions. Secondary aims were to determine trends in the use of definitive therapy, predictors of treatment type, and acute adverse events associated with primary modalities of treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS Data from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Oncology Outcomes Database from 2007 to 2011 for US patients with stage I NSCLC were used. Main outcome measures included patterns of care, predictors of treatment, acute morbidity, and acute mortality. RESULTS Seventy-nine percent of patients received surgery, 16% received definitive radiation therapy (RT), and 3% were not treated. Seventy-four percent of the RT patients received stereotactic body RT (SBRT), and the remainder received nonstereotactic RT (NSRT). Among participating NCCN member institutions, the number of surgeries-to-RT course ratios varied between 1.6 and 34.7 (P<.01), and the SBRT-to-NSRT ratio varied between 0 and 13 (P=.01). Significant variations were also observed in staging practices, with brain imaging 0.33 (0.25-0.43) times as likely and mediastinoscopy 31.26 (21.84-44.76) times more likely for surgical patients than for RT patients. Toxicity rates for surgical and for SBRT patients were similar, although the rates were double for NSRT patients. CONCLUSIONS The variations in treatment observed among NCCN institutions reflects the lack of level I evidence directing the use of surgery or SBRT for stage I NSCLC. In this setting, research of patient and physician preferences may help to guide future decision making.