Understanding the Use of Prostate Biopsy Among Men with Limited Life Expectancy in a Statewide Quality Improvement Collaborative

BACKGROUND: The potential harms of a prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis may outweigh its benefits in elderly men. OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of prostate biopsy in men with limited life expectancy (LE) within the practices comprising the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: MUSIC is a consortium of 42 practices and nearly 85% of the urologists in Michigan. From July 2013 to October 2014, clinical data were collected prospectively for all men undergoing prostate biopsy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We calculated comorbidity-adjusted LE in men aged ≥66 yr and identified men with(limited LE) undergoing a first biopsy. Our LE calculator was not designed for men agedyr; thus these men were excluded. Multivariable models estimated the proportion of all biopsies performed for men with limited LE in each MUSIC practice, adjusting for differences in patient characteristics. We also evaluated what treatments, if any, these patients received. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among 3035 men aged ≥66 yr undergoing initial prostate biopsy, 60% had none of the measured comorbidities. Overall, 547 men (18%) had limited LE. Compared with men with a longer LE, these men had significantly higher prostate-specific antigen levels and abnormal digital rectal examination findings. The adjusted proportion of biopsies performed for men with limited LE ranged from 3.8% to 39% across MUSIC practices (p \u3c 0.001). PCa was diagnosed in 69% of men with limited LE; among this group, 74% received any active treatment. Of these men, 46% had high-grade cancer (Gleason score 8-10). CONCLUSIONS: Among a large and diverse group of urology practices, nearly 20% of prostate biopsies are performed in men with limited LE. These data provide useful context for quality improvement efforts aimed at optimizing patient selection for prostate biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, nearly 2 of every 10 men undergoing prostate biopsy had a life expectancy (LE)biopsy

Establishment of a Web-based System for Collection of Patient-reported Outcomes After Radical Prostatectomy in a Statewide Quality Improvement Collaborative.

OBJECTIVE: To report on the establishment of a unified, electronic patient-reported outcome (PRO) infrastructure and pilot results from the first 5 practices enrolled in the web-based collection system developed by the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were those undergoing radical prostatectomy of 5 academic and community practices. PRO was obtained using a validated 21-item web-based questionnaire, regarding urinary function, erection function, and sexual interest and satisfaction. Data were collected preoperatively, at 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. Patients were provided a link via email to complete the surveys. Perioperative and PRO data were analyzed as reports for individual patients and summary performance reports for individual surgeons. RESULTS: Among 773 eligible patients, 688 (89%) were enrolled preoperatively. Survey completion rate was 88%, 84%, and 90% preoperatively, at 3 months, and 6 months. Electronic completion rates preoperatively, at 3 months, and 6 months were 70%, 70%, and 68%, respectively. Mean urinary function scores were 18.3, 14.3, and 16.6 (good function ≥ 17), whereas mean erection scores were 18.7, 7.3, and 9.1 (good erection score ≥ 22) before surgery, at 3 months, and 6 months. Variation was noted for erectile function among the practices. CONCLUSION: Collection of electronic PRO via this unified, web-based format was successful and provided results that reflect expected recovery and identify opportunities for improvement. This will be extended to more practices statewide to improve outcomes after radical prostatectomy

Appropriateness Criteria for Ureteral Stent Omission following Ureteroscopy for Urinary Stone Disease

Introduction: To bridge the gap between evidence and clinical judgment, we defined scenarios appropriate for ureteral stent omission after uncomplicated ureteroscopy (URS) using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. We retrospectively assessed rates of appropriate stent omission, with the goal to implement these criteria in clinical practice. Methods: A panel of 15 urologists from the MUSIC (Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative) met to define uncomplicated URS and the variables that influence stent omission decision making. Over 2 rounds, they scored clinical scenarios for appropriateness criteria (AC) for stent omission based on a combination of variables. AC were defined by median scores of 1 to 3 (inappropriate), 4 to 6 (uncertain) and 7 to 9 (appropriate). Multivariable analysis determined the association of each variable with AC scores. Uncomplicated URS cases in the MUSIC registry were assigned AC scores and stenting rates assessed. Results: Seven variables affecting stent decision making were identified. Of the 144 scenarios, 26 (18%) were appropriate, 88 (61%) inappropriate and 30 (21%) uncertain for stent omission. Most scenarios appropriate for omission were pre-stented (81%). Scenarios with ureteral access sheath or stones \u3e10 mm were only appropriate if pre-stented. Stenting rates of 5,181 URS cases correlated with AC scores. Stents were placed in 61% of cases appropriate for omission (practice range, 25% to 98%). Conclusions: We defined objective variables and AC for stent omission following uncomplicated URS. AC scores correlated with stenting rates but there was substantial practice variation. Our findings demonstrate that the appropriate use of stent omission is underutilized

Establishing a global quality of care benchmark report

Background: the Movember funded TrueNTH Global Registry (TNGR) aims to improve care by collecting and analysing a consistent dataset to identify variation in disease management, benchmark care delivery in accordance with best practice guidelines and provide this information to those in a position to enact change. We discuss considerations of designing and implementing a quality of care report for TNGR. Methods: eleven working group sessions were held prior to and as reports were being built with representation from clinicians, data managers and investigators contributing to TNGR. The aim of the meetings was to understand current data display approaches, share literature review findings and ideas for innovative approaches. Preferred displays were evaluated with two surveys (survey 1: 5 clinicians and 5 non-clinicians, 83% response rate; survey 2: 17 clinicians and 18 non-clinicians, 93% response rate). Results: consensus on dashboard design and three data-display preferences were achieved. The dashboard comprised two performance summary charts; one summarising site’s relative quality indicator (QI) performance and another to summarise data quality. Binary outcome QIs were presented as funnel plots. Patient-reported outcome measures of function score and the extent to which men were bothered by their symptoms were presented in bubble plots. Time series graphs were seen as providing important information to supplement funnel and bubble plots. R Markdown was selected as the software program principally because of its excellent analytic and graph display capacity, open source licensing model and the large global community sharing program code enhancements. Conclusions: international collaboration in creating and maintaining clinical quality registries has allowed benchmarking of process and outcome measures on a large scale. A registry report system was developed with stakeholder engagement to produce dynamic reports that provide user-specific feedback to 132 participating sites across 13 countries.</p