Sherrie Hertz

Enabling quality improvement in systemic cancer treatment through a collaborative approach.

88 Background: The Regional Systemic Treatment Program at Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) aims to ensure the highest quality of systemic treatment is available to Ontarians, as close to home as possible. CCO initiated a provincial collaborative with the aim of improving the safe delivery of parenteral chemotherapy from orders through preparation, to administration, for patients, and providers. METHODS From April 2011 to March 2012, interdisciplinary hospital teams across Ontario followed multiple Plan, Do, Study, Act cycles to perform QI projects focusing on safe delivery of systemic treatment. Over this period, three in-person sessions educating participants on improvement methodology were held. Monthly teleconferences and an electronic discussion forum encouraged a culture of knowledge sharing and collaboration. RESULTS 113 participants from 26 teams participated in a total of 81 improvement initiatives. 96% of participants surveyed indicated that the collaborative provided a valuable opportunity to network with peers, share ideas, and discuss lessons learned. During the collaborative, teams reported their progress on a scale of 1-5. At May 2011, teams averaged a self-assessment score of 1, indicating no progress had been made. By February 2012, this increased to an average score of 4, indicating significant progress and achievement of at least one improvement objective/goal. CCO has leveraged the foundations built by the collaborative to develop a Regional Quality and Safety Network. This network provides a regular forum for health care providers and administrators to share knowledge and collaborate on strategies for improving quality and safety in the delivery of systemic treatment. CONCLUSIONS The collaborative demonstrated that the use of a formal quality improvement model is a successful mechanism for regional engagement; that provides the foundation necessary for building a provincial network with common goals and understanding regarding quality improvement. By educating participants, supporting local efforts and enabling knowledge transfer and exchange, the collaborative showed that shared ideas and even small changes can lead to large-scale improvements for patients and providers.

Oral chemotherapy practices at Ontario cancer centres

Purpose The use of oral chemotherapy agents in cancer treatment is increasing. To better understand issues affecting the optimal use of these agents, Cancer Care Ontario conducted an environmental scan of current practices in Ontario related to prescribing, dispensing, patient education, and supporting regimen adherence. Methods A series of semi-structured interviews were conducted either by phone (11 regions) or via email (two regions) with Ontario’s Regional Cancer Centres over a 3-month period in 2012. A questionnaire was pre-circulated to the regions to guide the discussions. Results Responses were received from 13 of 14 regions. Considerable variation in practice was found. Of 13 responding regions, 12 (92%) lacked formal procedures or processes for the prescription of oral chemotherapy. Ten regions (77%) reported using either handwritten prescriptions or a mixture of methods with only three regions routinely using computerized order entry systems for oral chemotherapy prescribing. Oral chemotherapy was reported to be labeled as “chemotherapy” in 46% of the regions. Twenty-three percent indicated that they provide extensive patient education through a multi-disciplinary approach. A number of tools were used to encourage patient adherence in different regions. Patient education was identified as an area where more work could be done. Conclusion Results indicate a lack of formal policies and variable practices across all aspects of oral chemotherapy in many regions. However, some regions have developed and implemented successful initiatives. The results from this review are informing provincial priorities and being shared between regions to support collaborative learning.

Key components of intravenous chemotherapy labeling: A systematic review and practice guideline

Objective. To determine the necessary components and formatting of an intravenous chemotherapy label to maximize safe delivery and minimize errors. Date sources. The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (up to April 2009) were searched for relevant evidence. Reference lists from retained studies were then searched for additional trials. An environmental scan was also conducted to locate other published and unpublished sources of information. Study selection. Relevant articles were selected and reviewed by one methodologist. Articles were selected for inclusion if they were published English language reports of Phases II or III randomized controlled trials, other comparative studies, single-arm studies, practice guidelines, or systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses, which related to the study question. MEDLINE and EMBASE searches yielded 685 potential studies of which 17 met the inclusion criteria. The environmental scan located one guideline. Three additional relevant studies were identified during the external review process. In total, 21 documents met the inclusion criteria. Data extraction. Data were extracted by one methodologist. Quality of systematic reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR tool. All other studies were evaluated based on study characteristics applicable to the particular study design. Data synthesis. The evidence collected and the consensus of expert opinion of Cancer Care Ontario’s Chemotherapy Labeling Panel form the basis of a series of recommendations for the generation of intravenous chemotherapy labels including formatting, required information, and order of information. These guidelines inform the efficient, effective, and safe administration of intravenous chemotherapy. Illustrative examples are provided.

Using Breakthrough Series Collaborative Methodology to Improve Safe Delivery of Chemotherapy in Ontario

PURPOSE Chemotherapy delivery is complex, involving multiple providers across settings to deliver safe, effective care. Cancer Care Ontario initiated a provincial breakthrough series collaborative, based on methodology from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI), to improve the safe delivery of chemotherapy, from ordering through preparation and administration. METHODS Over the 1-year period of the collaborative, three in-person sessions educated participants on improvement methodology. Twenty teams tested and implemented elements of a predefined change package in their local systems. Monthly teleconferences supplemented the education while encouraging a culture of knowledge sharing. Teams completed monthly self-assessment surveys that evaluated their progress using a 6-point scale, where 1 indicated no evidence of improvement and 5 indicated achievement of all goals and improvement objectives. RESULTS Monthly self-assessment surveys revealed that over time, scores improved from 1 to 4, indicating significant progress. Moreover, 100% of participants reported in an exit survey that the collaborative had improved the culture of safety in their organizations. The gains of the collaborative have been sustained through development of a practice community and provision of ongoing coaching through the IHI Open School. CONCLUSION Participation in the collaborative enabled local interdisciplinary teams to develop processes and structures to support ongoing quality improvement, including formation of a sustainable structure for knowledge translation and exchange. However, lack of a shared provincial target limited overall evaluation. Other lessons learned included providing adequate time for planning and clearly defining roles and responsibilities of involved teams and project sponsors.

Use of Continuous Infusion Pumps During Radiation Treatment

INTRODUCTION Despite increasing chemoradiotherapy treatment, there is a paucity of information regarding the effects of radiation exposure on ambulatory infusion pumps used to deliver chemotherapy or other essential medications. The aim of this overview is to present the available evidence on this subject, heighten awareness within the clinical community, provide considerations for minimizing possible negative effects on patient care, and encourage the monitoring of infusion devices after exposure to radiation or electromagnetic interference. METHODS Published literature was systematically searched using MEDLINE and EMBASE; gray literature was searched using Google and an environmental scan of relevant Web sites. A multidisciplinary working group reviewed the compiled evidence, and a draft of the document was sent to health professionals from various disciplines for an external review. RESULTS Four reports and three manufacturer device alerts were identified that suggest a risk of pump malfunction as a result of radiation exposure. The estimated cumulative dose at which pump failure has been reported ranges from 28.5 to 42 Gy; however, additional clinical investigations should be undertaken. Pump relocation, pump shielding, and assessment of the pump after radiation exposure are most commonly suggested to minimize pump malfunction related to radiation exposure. A list of additional considerations is offered for those developing institution specific policies and procedures based on the available evidence and expert consensus. CONCLUSION The varied and unpredictable results of radiation exposure on infusion devices suggest that additional testing should be carried out to determine the limits of dose exposure and to raise awareness around this patient safety issue.

Managing chemotherapy drug shortages in Ontario.

192 Background: Chemotherapy drug shortages are common and unpredictable. The causes are multifactorial and the negative effects on patients and practitioners have been well described. In an effort to mitigate the impact of this problem, Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) has developed a coordinated approach to the management of chemotherapy drug shortages. Tactics have included a system level strategy to promote communication through a virtual collaborative workspace for providers to network and share management strategies and inventory, where feasible. Disease site experts have also developed clinical guidance for the management of specific drug shortages which have then supported public funding decisions that enabled the use of substitute chemotherapy agents in a number of instances. METHODS The impact and management of a recent shortage of liposomal doxorubicin (LD), a publically funded drug for patients with platinum refractory ovarian cancer is described for both new chemotherapy starts and for prevalent LD treated cases. Expert clinical guidance supported a funding policy amendment so patients already on treatment could switch to a recognized substitute drug, topotecan (TT). This also became the preferred funded option for new platinum refractory patients. RESULTS LD was in short supply between August 2011 and December 2012. In the quarter prior to shortage, 83 new platinum refractory patients started on LD and 1 on TT. During that time, the average number of monthly prevalent LD and TT treated cases was 80 and 4 respectively. For the first quarter post shortage, 20 new patients started on LD and 34 patients started on TT. The average monthly prevalent treated cases were 49 and 21 respectively. Funding for the switch from LD to TT was requested in only 7 cases. Therefore, the total number of new and prevalent treated cases on either preferred therapy dropped post LD shortage. This decline worsened with each subsequent quarter and immediately returned to baseline when the shortage resolved. Drug procurement costs were lower during the period of shortage. CONCLUSIONS Drug shortages have a significant impact on patients and providers. Even when appropriate substitutes are available, quality of care may be affected.

Recommendations for the delivery of focal tumor ablation services.

106 Background: The objective of this work was to develop recommendations for the organization and delivery of focal tumor ablation services. New, minimally-invasive ablation technologies such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA), microwave ablation (MWA), and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) offer treatment options for patients with a variety of cancers. These emerging therapies can improve patient care (minimize side-effects, offer more rapid recovery with comparable or enhanced outcomes) compared to traditional approaches. However, they are often resource intensive, necessitating a planned system-level approach to ensure appropriate access to high quality services while optimizing care and resource utilization. METHODS This work was led by an Advisory Committee with regional, clinical, administrative and patient representatives and was based on best available evidence, current practice in Ontario, Canada, and guidance from other jurisdictions and experts in the field. A variety of data sources (clinical, system, provider), consultation with external stakeholders and consensus building supported the final recommendations. RESULTS Thirteen recommendations were developed. Clinical criteria are detailed for RFA for liver, kidney and lung tumors and TACE for hepatocellular carcinoma. MWA is not recommended for lung, liver or kidney tumors. System recommendations include infrastructure (capital equipment, multidisciplinary management and case conference review), the importance of volume-related expertise, and oversight for funding and collaborative planning. Results were broadly disseminated through 12 stakeholder groups connecting with over 40,000 individuals. CONCLUSIONS A systematic approach to understanding opportunities and challenges for focal tumor ablation therapies resulted in multi-level recommendations spanning clinical criteria through to quality oversight. These recommendations will support improvements in care delivery in daily practice and at the system level.

Improving the safe delivery of systemic treatment by assessing concordance with labeling guidelines.

257 Background: Improper labeling of medication may lead to errors. In 2009, Cancer Care Ontario published Key Components of Chemotherapy Labeling, with recommendations for the necessary components and formatting of intravenous chemotherapy labels. A jurisdiction-wide evaluation for concordance occurred in 2011. Results were shared, improvement efforts were supported through a provincial quality network, and a re-evaluation was conducted in the fall of 2013. METHODS Three defined chemotherapy labels were evaluated at baseline and after improvement strategies were implemented at each of Ontarios 77 hospitals providing systemic treatment. Labels were reviewed centrally and awarded points for concordance for each of 15 guideline-specified criteria. RESULTS The provincial average overall score for concordance increased from 59% to 80% (p<0.001). Improvement was seen for 12 of the 15 criteria evaluated and for 64 of the 77 facilities. The greatest increase in overall score by a facility was 53.4%. The greatest overall improvement in score for an individual component was 67% (TALLman lettering). The scores of 2 components were unchanged, as 100% concordance was achieved on both the baseline and re-evaluation. CONCLUSIONS Improvement in concordance to chemotherapy labeling guidelines was observed following the implementation of a measurement strategy and improvement plans. This approach is one component of a larger strategy to promote a culture of safety in chemotherapy delivery in Ontario. [Table: see text].

Concordance with best-practice guidelines for systemic treatment computerized prescriber order entry systems.

245 Background: In 2012, Cancer Care Ontario, released evidence-based guidance for the key features, functionalities, and components of a Systemic Treatment Computerized Prescriber Order Entry (ST CPOE) system to ensure safe, high-quality care. Concordance measurement indicators were developed alongside the guidelines and a survey was then conducted to understand the current state in a meaningful and practical manner in the province of Ontario. METHODS A self-assessment survey was distributed to 22 hospital groups, including cancer centres and both academic and community hospitals, using four different ST CPOE systems in Ontario. 52 items were assessed on a four-point Likert scale, and descriptive hospital data was collected. Composite scores were calculated by category (regimen and protocols, functionality, useful alerts, audit logs, system integration, usability) and overall. Local and provincial results were analyzed. RESULTS Twenty-one (21) responses were received, with the majority (17) of surveys being completed by pharmacists. 48% had been using a ST CPOE system for more than 5 years and 38% for less than one year. 81% responded that they did not, or did not know if, they had local/institutional indicators for monitoring their systems. The mean total concordance score overall was 79% (range 65% to 92%) of a potential 208 total points. The highest mean score was in the category of audit logs (92%) and the lowest in system integration (69%). Approximately half (48%) had a multidisciplinary ST CPOE advisory group. While 16 hospitals were using the same ST CPOE system, there was distinct variability in responses from these sites, indicating the effects of tailored implementations and/or discrepancy in level of knowledge of system functionalities. CONCLUSIONS Current concordance with best practice guidelines for ST CPOE systems in Ontario is incomplete and variable. While ST CPOE systems have potential to improve safety in the chemotherapy delivery, differences in system functionalities and their implementation have been identified. This study will be used to inform specific areas of strength, set benchmarks and potential areas for improvement.

Developing a culture of safety in systemic cancer treatment at the system level.

230 Background: Chemotherapy ordering, preparation and delivery involve multiple providers and complex systems where high impact errors may occur. Cancer Care Ontario, a provincial agency responsible for continually improving cancer services in Ontario, Canada employs a comprehensive systematic approach to build a culture of safety for systemic treatment. METHODS A comprehensive strategy is applied at 77 systemic treatment hospitals in the Province. A multi-pronged approach is used that includes: 1) system planning, organization and funding, 2) engagement of health care providers working at the regional and local levels, 3) guidelines implementation and, 4) quality measurement. RESULTS Institutions are organized into regional networks, according to four levels of service complexity based on quality standards, planning, funding, coordination and health human resources. A customized, system-wide incident reporting system is available. Quality improvement is undertaken in several ways. Regional clinical and administrative leaders foster engagement with local providers and work is facilitated by a provincial multidisciplinary community of practice, an annual Safety Symposium, and local improvement projects with funding support. In this way, collaborative sharing and learning occurs across the Province. Comprehensive evidence-based guidelines have been produced addressing safe labeling, administration, handling and the use of computerized prescriber order entry systems. Routine performance management together with guideline concordance measurement, public reporting, planning for improvement and re-evaluation strategies, has produced system improvements. CONCLUSIONS A comprehensive, evidence-based and systematically applied approach to providing systemic cancer treatment can produce a culture of safety that is coordinated and standardized across multiple providers and provider sites.