This study sought to improve mental health care for patients with head and neck cancers (HNCs) through the implementation of an evidence-based process for identifying and managing psychological distress. This process in an HNC medical oncology clinic was assessed and redesigned using quality improvement (QI) methods from November 2010 through April 2012. The redesign, starting in January 2011, involved a 2-component QI intervention: the validated NCCN Distress Thermometer and an evidence-based treatment decision algorithm. Screening processes were improved through Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles. Before January 2011, distress identification was based on a provider's clinical assessment. Cause-effect diagramming suggested that lack of a formalized process for distress assessment contributed to missed diagnoses. Providers were also unfamiliar with mental health resources. After implementing process changes, biweekly distress screening rates rose from 0% to 38% between January and July 2011. Furthermore, with additional PDSA cycles, these rates increased to 74% between October 2011 and April 2012. Similar to proposed benchmarks, 84% (n=47) of newly diagnosed patients (n=56) were screened. Improvement in screening was attributed to process changes and involvement of senior leadership. QI principles can be applied to the cancer setting in order to create systems of care which more reliably identify and address the needs of patients with psychological distress.
Natalie Riblet, Karen Skalla, Auden McClure, Karen Homa, Alison Luciano, and Thomas H. Davis
Peter R. Carroll, J. Kellogg Parsons, Gerald Andriole, Robert R. Bahnson, Daniel A. Barocas, Erik P. Castle, William J. Catalona, Douglas M. Dahl, John W. Davis, Jonathan I. Epstein, Ruth B. Etzioni, Thomas Farrington, George P. Hemstreet III, Mark H. Kawachi, Paul H. Lange, Kevin R. Loughlin, William Lowrance, Paul Maroni, James Mohler, Todd M. Morgan, Robert B. Nadler, Michael Poch, Chuck Scales, Terrence M. Shaneyfelt, Marc C. Smaldone, Geoffrey Sonn, Preston Sprenke, Andrew J. Vickers, Robert Wake, Dorothy A. Shead, and Deborah Freedman-Cass
Prostate cancer represents a spectrum of disease that ranges from nonaggressive, slow-growing disease that may not require treatment to aggressive, fast-growing disease that does. The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide a set of sequential recommendations detailing a screening and evaluation strategy for maximizing the detection of prostate cancer that is potentially curable and that, if left undetected, represents a risk to the patient. The guidelines were developed for healthy men who have elected to participate in the early detection of prostate cancer, and they focus on minimizing unnecessary procedures and limiting the detection of indolent disease.
Peter R. Carroll, J. Kellogg Parsons, Gerald Andriole, Robert R. Bahnson, Erik P. Castle, William J. Catalona, Douglas M. Dahl, John W. Davis, Jonathan I. Epstein, Ruth B. Etzioni, Thomas Farrington, George P. Hemstreet III, Mark H. Kawachi, Simon Kim, Paul H. Lange, Kevin R. Loughlin, William Lowrance, Paul Maroni, James Mohler, Todd M. Morgan, Kelvin A. Moses, Robert B. Nadler, Michael Poch, Chuck Scales, Terrence M. Shaneyfelt, Marc C. Smaldone, Geoffrey Sonn, Preston Sprenkle, Andrew J. Vickers, Robert Wake, Dorothy A. Shead, and Deborah A. Freedman-Cass
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide recommendations for prostate cancer screening in healthy men who have elected to participate in an early detection program. The NCCN Guidelines focus on minimizing unnecessary procedures and limiting the detection of indolent disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Prostate Cancer Early Detection Panel's most significant discussions for the 2016 guideline update, which included issues surrounding screening in high-risk populations (ie, African Americans, BRCA1/2 mutation carriers), approaches to refine patient selection for initial and repeat biopsies, and approaches to improve biopsy specificity.
James L. Mohler, Andrew J. Armstrong, Robert R. Bahnson, Anthony Victor D'Amico, Brian J. Davis, James A. Eastham, Charles A. Enke, Thomas A. Farrington, Celestia S. Higano, Eric M. Horwitz, Michael Hurwitz, Christopher J. Kane, Mark H. Kawachi, Michael Kuettel, Richard J. Lee, Joshua J. Meeks, David F. Penson, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Julio M. Pow-Sang, David Raben, Sylvia Richey, Mack Roach III, Stan Rosenfeld, Edward Schaeffer, Ted A. Skolarus, Eric J. Small, Guru Sonpavde, Sandy Srinivas, Seth A. Strope, Jonathan Tward, Dorothy A. Shead, and Deborah A. Freedman-Cass
The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer address staging and risk assessment after an initial diagnosis of prostate cancer and management options for localized, regional, and metastatic disease. Recommendations for disease monitoring, treatment of recurrent disease, and systemic therapy for metastatic castration-recurrent prostate cancer also are included. This article summarizes the NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel's most significant discussions for the 2016 update of the guidelines, which include refinement of risk stratification methods and new options for the treatment of men with high-risk and very-high-risk disease and progressive castration-naïve disease.