Communities of practice: A jurisdictional approach to improving the quality of care in radiation medicine in Ontario.

Authors

null

Elizabeth Lockhart

Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada

Elizabeth Lockhart, Michelle Ang, Lindsay Elizabeth Reddeman, Michael Sharpe, Margaret Hart, Carina Simniceanu, Stephen Breen, Joon-Hyung J. Kim, Dani Scott, Khaled Zaza, David D'Souza, Michael F. Milosevic, Stewart Gaede, Andrea Marshall, Brian P Yaremko, Katharina Sixel, Nicole Harnett, Eric Gutierrez, Padraig Richard Warde

Organizations

Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada, Princess Margaret Hospital and University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada, R.S. McLaughlin Durham Regional Cancer Centre, Oshawa, ON, Canada, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada, Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada, London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON, Canada, Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston, ON, Canada, Department of Radiation Oncology, London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON, Canada, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada, London Regional Cancer Program, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada

Research Funding

No funding sources reported

Background: The Radiation Treatment Program (RTP) at Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) established several Communities of Practice (CoPs), with the goal of improving radiation treatment (RT) quality and safety. The RTP identifies variation in practice and quality improvement (QI) opportunities in the 14 Regional Cancer Centres (RCCs) and facilitates the development of CoPs to share best practices and standardize care. Methods: Since 2010, the RTP has formed 7 CoPs ( > 185 members in total): 4 intra-disciplinary (Radiation Therapy, Medical Physics, Advanced Practice Radiation Therapy, Radiation Safety) and 3 inter-disciplinary (Head and Neck (HN), Gynecological (GYNE) and Lung Cancer). Members are recruited with the aim of securing engagement from all RCCs to ensure representation of regional diversity and to facilitate adoption of best practices. CoPs are supported with nominal funding and resources provided by CCO, but are led and driven by members, who identify and prioritize key quality issues and select corresponding QI projects to pursue. The RTP performs regular evaluation activities to assess initiative engagement and impact. Results: RTP CoPs have enhanced the quality and safety of RT delivery in Ontario through QI initiatives, advice documents and tools that have enabled: Improved RT safety (use of safety straps in RT delivery); Adoption of best practices (RT plan evaluation guidance); Education and knowledge transfer – (stereotactic body RT implementation and training framework); and Support for infrastructure improvements (recommendation for additional Magnetic Resonance-guided brachytherapy units) (https://www.cancercare.on.ca/ocs/clinicalprogs/radiationtreatment/). Advice documents have improved alignment with recommended practice (40% and 50% absolute increases in two HN initiatives). Evaluation surveys indicate that members believe the CoPs have enhanced inter-regional communication and collaboration (89%), knowledge transfer/exchange (91%), and professional networking between RCCs (92%). Conclusions: CoPs can be a highly effective model for improving quality of care. The establishment of CoPs should be considered for QI in other areas of the healthcare system.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2016 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session A: Practice of Quality and Cost, Value, and Policy in Quality

Track

Cost, Value, and Policy in Quality,Practice of Quality,Science of Quality

Sub Track

Learning from Projects Done in a Health System

Citation

J Clin Oncol 34, 2016 (suppl 7S; abstr 122)

DOI

10.1200/jco.2016.34.7_suppl.122

Abstract #

122

Poster Bd #

L5

Abstract Disclosures