NCCN Policy Summit: Defining, Measuring, and Applying Quality in an Evolving Health Policy Landscape and the Implications for Cancer Care

View More View Less
  • 1 National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania;
  • 2 Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut;
  • 3 Humana, Louisville, Kentucky;
  • 4 The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Dallas, Texas; and
  • 5 Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, Washington.
Restricted access

Quality measurement is a critical component of advancing a health system that pays for performance over volume. Although there has been significant attention paid to quality measurement within health systems in recent years, significant challenges to meaningful measurement of quality care outcomes remain. Defining cost can be challenging, but is arguably not as elusive as quality, which lacks standard measurement methods and units. To identify industry standards and recommendations for the future, NCCN recently hosted the NCCN Oncology Policy Summit: Defining, Measuring, and Applying Quality in an Evolving Health Policy Landscape and the Implications for Cancer Care. Key stakeholders including physicians, payers, policymakers, patient advocates, and technology partners reviewed current quality measurement programs to identify success and challenges, including the Oncology Care Model. Speakers and panelists identified gaps in quality measurement and provided insights and suggestions for further advancing quality measurement in oncology. This article provides insights and recommendations; however, the goal of this program was to highlight key issues and not to obtain consensus.

Submitted March 11, 2020; accepted for publication May 28 2020.

Disclosures: Dr. Adelson has disclosed that she has received grant/research support from Genentech. Dr. Loy has disclosed that he is an employee of Humana. Ms. Bandini, Ms. Gallo, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Martin, Ms. Schatz, and Dr. Carlson are employees of NCCN. The remaining authors have disclosed that they have no financial interests, arrangements, affiliations, or commercial interests with the manufacturers of any products discussed in this article or their competitors

Correspondence: Lindsey A.M. Bandini, MPH, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 3025 Chemical Road, Suite 100, Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462. Email: bandini@nccn.org
  • 1.

    Department of Health and Human Services. Updates to the Quality Payment Program. Fed Regist 2019;84:40482–41289. Section III.K. Accessed November 1, 2019. Available at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-08-14/pdf/2019-16041.pdf

  • 2.

    Oncology Care First Model: Informal Request for Information. Accessed November 13, 2019. Available at: https://innovation.cms.gov/Files/x/ocf-informalrfi.pdf

  • 3.

    Miniemyer P. Blues Plans to Launch High-Performance Network Nationwide in 2021. FierceHealthcare. Accessed November 13, 2019. Available at: https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/payer/blues-plans-to-launch-high-performance-network-nationwide-2021.

  • 4.

    Mariotto AB, Yabroff KR, Shao Y, . Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:117128.

  • 5.

    Adelson KB, Velji S, Patel K, . Preparing for value-based payment: a stepwise approach for cancer centers. J Oncol Pract 2016;12:e924932.

  • 6.

    Adelson K. Defining and measuring quality under current value-based care models and implications for the delivery of cancer care. NCCN Policy Summit: Defining, Measuring, and Applying Quality in an Evolving Health Policy Landscape and the Implications for Cancer Care; September 12, 2019; Washington, DC.

  • 7.

    Verrilli D. Defining and measuring quality under current value-based care models and implications for the delivery of cancer care. NCCN Policy Summit: Defining, Measuring, and Applying Quality in an Evolving Health Policy Landscape and the Implications for Cancer Care; September 12, 2019; Washington, DC.

  • 8.

    Morse S. Providers and payers both win when they share population health data. Healthcare Finance News, September 14, 2017. Accessed: January 10, 2020. Available at: https://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/providers-and-payers-both-win-when-they-share-population-health-data

  • 9.

    Valuck T, Blaisdell D, Tirodkar MA. Oncology quality measurement: angst and ambition. Accessed: January 10, 2020. Available at: https://www.journalofclinicalpathways.com/commentary/oncology-quality-measurement-angst-and-ambition

  • 10.

    Adelson K, Balch A, Chong A, . Application and measurement of quality in cancer care delivery systems: challenges & lessons learned. Panel discussion at the NCCN Policy Summit: Defining, Measuring, and Applying Quality in an Evolving Health Policy Landscape and the Implications for Cancer Care; September 12, 2020; Washington, D.C.

    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Berry LL, Mate KS. Essentials for improving service quality in cancer care. Healthc (Amst) 2016;4:312316.

  • 12.

    Alpert JM, Morris BB, Thomson MD, . Identifying how patient portals impact communication in oncology. Health Commun 2019;34:13951403.

  • 13.

    Fargnoli B, Holleran R, Kolodziej M. Why oncologists need technology to succeed in alternative payment models. Am J Manag Care 2017;23:SP196198.

  • 14.

    Warsame R, Halyard M. Patient-reported outcome measurement in clinical practice: overcoming challenges to continue progress. J Clin Pathw 2017;3:4346.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Castellucci M. 20 years after 'To Err is Human,' hospital care quality measures are still of little use. Modern Healthcare 2019. Accessed: January 10, 2020. Available at: https://www.modernhealthcare.com/safety-quality/20-years-after-err-human-hospital-care-quality-measures-are-still-little-use

  • 16.

    Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, eds. To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: National Academies Press (US); 2000.

  • 17.

    Hendee WR. To err is human: building a safer health system. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2001;12(Suppl):P112113.

  • 18.

    Shantanu A. The role of standardized performance measures in ensuring quality in cancer care. NCCN Policy Summit: Defining, Measuring, and Applying Quality in an Evolving Health Policy Landscape and the Implications for Cancer Care; September 12, 2020; Washington, DC.

  • 19.

    Basch E, Deal AM, Kris MG, . Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:557565.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Duseja R, Loy B, Martineau J, . The future of defining, standardizing, and reporting quality in cancer care. NCCN Policy Summit: Defining, Measuring, and Applying Quality in an Evolving Health Policy Landscape and the Implications for Cancer Care; September 12, 2020; Washington, DC.

  • 21.

    Kline R, Adelson K, Kirshner JJ, . The oncology care model: perspectives from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and participating oncology practices in academia and the community. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2017;37:460466.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Barr PJ, Elwyn G. Measurement challenges in shared decision making: putting the ‘patient’ in patient-reported measures. Health Expect 2016;19:9931001.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 985 985 818
PDF Downloads 134 134 102
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0