ENHANCING NATIONWIDE IMPLEMENTATION OF STANDARDIZED STRUCTURED REPORTING (SSR) IN PATHOLOGY: A MULTIFACETED DIGITAL STRATEGY FOR ONCOLOGY CARE
Main Article Content
Keywords
Clinical practice guidelines, Effect evaluation, Guideline adherence, Healthcare quality improvement, Information technology, Implementation, Oncology, Process evaluation, Standardized structured reporting
Abstract
While some new surgeons are trusted with major cases from the start, facing surgical residency programs is a big challenge for them. Due to the trend of more chronic diseases in elderly people, new surgeons find it hard to get surgical jobs for training. The main problem is that big cities reached their maximum medical capacity at the same time villages and rural areas can’t draw qualified staff because of the lack of infrastructure. Because of increased use of advanced surgeries, the number of general surgery specialists in community hospitals is low, decreasing the services offered to patients. Because of their big medical expenses and low wages for their efforts, veterans struggle with job-related obstacles and have difficulties finding work. Those who practice surgery in outpatient settings by performing minimally invasive operations should put a strong emphasis on learning new skills. Medical experts starting their surgical careers now need to have physical, IT skills, business knowledge and be adaptable. Mixing guidance-based mentoring, improved health support in villages, along with helping medics get funding, is vital for specialists to be skilled and have their loans written off. It considers the key difficulties of new general surgeons to demonstrate that improving staff layout will better ensure there are competent workers to address health needs in advance.
References
1. Regieraad Kwaliteit van Zorg. Richtlijn voor Richtlijnen. 2012.
2. Federatie Medisch Specialisten. Richtlijnen database. 2021 Accessed 21 July 2021.
3. van den Berg I, van de Weerd S, van Klaveren D, van den Braak RC, van Krieken JHJM, Koopman M, et al. Daily practice in guideline adherence to adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III colon cancer and predictors of outcome. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021;47(8):2060–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.03.236.
4. Stienen JJ, Hermens RP, Wennekes L, van de Schans SA, van der Maazen RW, Dekker HM, et al. Variation in guideline adherence in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma care: impact of patient and hospital characteristics. BMC Cancer. 2015;15(1):1–11.
5. IJsbrandy C, Ottevanger PB, Gerritsen WR, van Harten WH, Hermens RP. Determinants of adherence to physical cancer rehabilitation guidelines among cancer patients and cancer centers: a cross-sectional observational study. J Cancer Survivor. 2021;15(1):163–177.
6. Wensing M, Grol R, Grimshaw J. Improving patient care: The implementation of change in health care. 3rd ed. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell; 2020.
7. Wensing M, Grol R. Knowledge translation in health: how implementation science could contribute more. BMC medicine. 2019;17(1):88.
8. BJ, Fernandez ME, Williams NJ, Aarons GA, Beidas RS, Lewis CC, et al. Enhancing the impact of implementation strategies in healthcare: a research agenda. Front Public Health. 2019;7:3.
9. Sluijter CE, van Workum F, Wiggers T, van de Water C, Visser O, van Slooten H-J, et al. Improvement of Care in Patients With Colorectal Cancer: Influence of the Introduction of Standardized Structured Reporting for Pathology. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2019;3:1–12.
10. Sluijter CE, van Lonkhuijzen LR, van Slooten HJ, Nagtegaal ID, Overbeek LI. The effects of implementing synoptic pathology reporting in cancer diagnosis: a systematic review. Virchows Arch. 2016;468(6):639–649. doi: 10.1007/s00428-016-1935-8.
11. Baranov NS, Nagtegaal ID, van Grieken NC, Verhoeven RH, Voorham QJ, Rosman C, van der Post RS. Synoptic reporting increases quality of upper gastrointestinal cancer pathology reports. Virchows Archiv. 2019;475(2):255–9.
12. ICCR. Datasets. 2020. http://www.iccr-cancer.org/datasets. Accessed 16 Apr 2020.
13. WEBSITE Foundation. Jaarverslag 2021. Accessed 21 July 2021.
14. ICCR. Annual report 2020. 2020. http://www.iccr-cancer.org/ICCR/media/Documents/Annual-Report-2020.pdf. Accessed 21 July 2021.
15. Haugland HK, Casati B, Dørum LM, Bjugn R. Template reporting matters—a nationwide study on histopathology reporting on colorectal carcinoma resections. Human Pathol. 2011;42(1):36–40.
16. Branston LK, Greening S, Newcombe RG, Daoud R, Abraham JM, Wood F, et al. The implementation of guidelines and computerised forms improves the completeness of cancer pathology reporting. The CROPS project: a randomised controlled trial in pathology. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38(6):764–772.
17. Srigley JR, McGowan T, Maclean A, Raby M, Ross J, Kramer S, et al. Standardized synoptic cancer pathology reporting: a population-based approach. J Surg Oncol. 2009;99(8):517–524.
18. Casati B, Bjugn R. Structured electronic template for histopathology reporting on colorectal carcinoma resections: five-year follow-up shows sustainable long-term quality improvement. Arch Pathol Laboratory Med. 2012;136(6):652–656. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2011-0370-OA. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Swillens JEM, Sluijter CE, Overbeek LIH, Nagtegaal ID, Hermens RPMG. Identification of barriers and facilitators in nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting in pathology: a mixed method study. Virchows Archiv. 2019;475(5):551–61.
20. Swillens JE, Voorham QJ, Nagtegaal ID, Hermens RP. Improving interdisciplinary communication: barriers and facilitators for implementation of standardized structured reporting in oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2021;1(aop):1–11. [DOI] [PubMed]
21. Blake H, Bermingham F, Johnson G, Tabner A. Mitigating the psychological impact of COVID-19 on healthcare workers: a digital learning package. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(9):2997.
22. Swillens JE, Voorham QJ, Nagtegaal ID, Hermens RP. Evidence-Based Selection, Development, and Testing of a Tailored Strategy to Improve Standardized Structured Reporting in Pathology: A Multicenter Study. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2022. [DOI] [PubMed]
23. Pinnock H, Barwick M, Carpenter CR, Eldridge S, Grandes G, Griffiths CJ, et al. Standards for reporting implementation studies (StaRI) statement. BMJ. 2017;356:i6795. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
24. Oncoline. Dutch guidelines for colorectal cancer. 2016. http://www.oncoline.nl/colorectaalcarcinoom. Accessed 21 July 2021.
25. Oncoline. Dutch guidelines for breast cancer. 2019. Accessed 21 July 2021.
26. College of American Pathologists. Current CAP guidelines. 2020. Accessed 12 Nov 2020.
27. The Royal College of Pathologists. Cancer. Datasets and tissue pathways. 2020. Accessed 12 Nov 2020.
28. WEBSITE Foundation. WEBSITE Protocols. 2019. Accessed 15 June 2019.
29. Dutch Pathology Association (NVVP). De Commissie Kwaliteit en Beroepsuitoefening (CKBU). 2021. Accessed 16 Dec 2021.
30. Hoffmann TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, et al. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ. 2014;348:g1687. [DOI] [PubMed]
31. WEBSITE Foundation. Public Pathology Database. 2019. Accessed 21 May 2019.
32. Penfold RB, Zhang F. Use of interrupted time series analysis in evaluating health care quality improvements. Acad Pediatr. 2013;13(6):S38–S44.
33. Bernal JL, Cummins S, Gasparrini A. Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: a tutorial. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46(1):348–355.
34. Bowen DJ, Kreuter M, Spring B, Cofta-Woerpel L, Linnan L, Weiner D, et al. How we design feasibility studies. Am J Prev Med. 2009;36(5):452–457.
35. Hulscher ME, Laurant MG, Grol RP. Process evaluation on quality improvement interventions. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12(1):40–46.
36. Cuble. Cuble. 2021. Accessed 23 Dec 2021.
37. Fan W, Yan Z. Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: a systematic review. Comput Human Behav. 2010;26(2):132–139.
38. Lankshear S, Srigley J, McGowan T, Yurcan M, Sawka C. Standardized synoptic cancer pathology reports - so what and who cares? A population-based satisfaction survey of 970 pathologists, surgeons, and oncologists. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137(11):1599–1602.
39. Hassell LA, Parwani AV, Weiss L, Jones MA, Ye J. Challenges and opportunities in the adoption of College of American Pathologists checklists in electronic format: perspectives and experience of Reporting Pathology Protocols Project (RPP2) participant laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(8):1152–1159.
40. Dutch Pathology Association (NVVP). SKMS kwaliteitsprojecten. 2021. Accessed 22 Dec 2021.
41. Torous VF, Allan RW, Balani J, Baskovich B, Birdsong GG, Dellers E. Exploring the College of American Pathologists Electronic Cancer Checklists: What they are and what they can do for you. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2021;145(4):392–8.
42. Dinmohamed AG, Visser O, Verhoeven RH, Louwman MW, van Nederveen FH, Willems SM, et al. Fewer cancer diagnoses during the COVID-19 epidemic in the Netherlands. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(6):750–751.
43. Kok G, Gottlieb NH, Peters GJY, et al. A taxonomy of behaviour change methods: an intervention mapping approach. Health Psychol Rev. 2016;10(3):297–312.
2. Federatie Medisch Specialisten. Richtlijnen database. 2021 Accessed 21 July 2021.
3. van den Berg I, van de Weerd S, van Klaveren D, van den Braak RC, van Krieken JHJM, Koopman M, et al. Daily practice in guideline adherence to adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III colon cancer and predictors of outcome. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021;47(8):2060–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.03.236.
4. Stienen JJ, Hermens RP, Wennekes L, van de Schans SA, van der Maazen RW, Dekker HM, et al. Variation in guideline adherence in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma care: impact of patient and hospital characteristics. BMC Cancer. 2015;15(1):1–11.
5. IJsbrandy C, Ottevanger PB, Gerritsen WR, van Harten WH, Hermens RP. Determinants of adherence to physical cancer rehabilitation guidelines among cancer patients and cancer centers: a cross-sectional observational study. J Cancer Survivor. 2021;15(1):163–177.
6. Wensing M, Grol R, Grimshaw J. Improving patient care: The implementation of change in health care. 3rd ed. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell; 2020.
7. Wensing M, Grol R. Knowledge translation in health: how implementation science could contribute more. BMC medicine. 2019;17(1):88.
8. BJ, Fernandez ME, Williams NJ, Aarons GA, Beidas RS, Lewis CC, et al. Enhancing the impact of implementation strategies in healthcare: a research agenda. Front Public Health. 2019;7:3.
9. Sluijter CE, van Workum F, Wiggers T, van de Water C, Visser O, van Slooten H-J, et al. Improvement of Care in Patients With Colorectal Cancer: Influence of the Introduction of Standardized Structured Reporting for Pathology. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2019;3:1–12.
10. Sluijter CE, van Lonkhuijzen LR, van Slooten HJ, Nagtegaal ID, Overbeek LI. The effects of implementing synoptic pathology reporting in cancer diagnosis: a systematic review. Virchows Arch. 2016;468(6):639–649. doi: 10.1007/s00428-016-1935-8.
11. Baranov NS, Nagtegaal ID, van Grieken NC, Verhoeven RH, Voorham QJ, Rosman C, van der Post RS. Synoptic reporting increases quality of upper gastrointestinal cancer pathology reports. Virchows Archiv. 2019;475(2):255–9.
12. ICCR. Datasets. 2020. http://www.iccr-cancer.org/datasets. Accessed 16 Apr 2020.
13. WEBSITE Foundation. Jaarverslag 2021. Accessed 21 July 2021.
14. ICCR. Annual report 2020. 2020. http://www.iccr-cancer.org/ICCR/media/Documents/Annual-Report-2020.pdf. Accessed 21 July 2021.
15. Haugland HK, Casati B, Dørum LM, Bjugn R. Template reporting matters—a nationwide study on histopathology reporting on colorectal carcinoma resections. Human Pathol. 2011;42(1):36–40.
16. Branston LK, Greening S, Newcombe RG, Daoud R, Abraham JM, Wood F, et al. The implementation of guidelines and computerised forms improves the completeness of cancer pathology reporting. The CROPS project: a randomised controlled trial in pathology. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38(6):764–772.
17. Srigley JR, McGowan T, Maclean A, Raby M, Ross J, Kramer S, et al. Standardized synoptic cancer pathology reporting: a population-based approach. J Surg Oncol. 2009;99(8):517–524.
18. Casati B, Bjugn R. Structured electronic template for histopathology reporting on colorectal carcinoma resections: five-year follow-up shows sustainable long-term quality improvement. Arch Pathol Laboratory Med. 2012;136(6):652–656. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2011-0370-OA. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Swillens JEM, Sluijter CE, Overbeek LIH, Nagtegaal ID, Hermens RPMG. Identification of barriers and facilitators in nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting in pathology: a mixed method study. Virchows Archiv. 2019;475(5):551–61.
20. Swillens JE, Voorham QJ, Nagtegaal ID, Hermens RP. Improving interdisciplinary communication: barriers and facilitators for implementation of standardized structured reporting in oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2021;1(aop):1–11. [DOI] [PubMed]
21. Blake H, Bermingham F, Johnson G, Tabner A. Mitigating the psychological impact of COVID-19 on healthcare workers: a digital learning package. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(9):2997.
22. Swillens JE, Voorham QJ, Nagtegaal ID, Hermens RP. Evidence-Based Selection, Development, and Testing of a Tailored Strategy to Improve Standardized Structured Reporting in Pathology: A Multicenter Study. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2022. [DOI] [PubMed]
23. Pinnock H, Barwick M, Carpenter CR, Eldridge S, Grandes G, Griffiths CJ, et al. Standards for reporting implementation studies (StaRI) statement. BMJ. 2017;356:i6795. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
24. Oncoline. Dutch guidelines for colorectal cancer. 2016. http://www.oncoline.nl/colorectaalcarcinoom. Accessed 21 July 2021.
25. Oncoline. Dutch guidelines for breast cancer. 2019. Accessed 21 July 2021.
26. College of American Pathologists. Current CAP guidelines. 2020. Accessed 12 Nov 2020.
27. The Royal College of Pathologists. Cancer. Datasets and tissue pathways. 2020. Accessed 12 Nov 2020.
28. WEBSITE Foundation. WEBSITE Protocols. 2019. Accessed 15 June 2019.
29. Dutch Pathology Association (NVVP). De Commissie Kwaliteit en Beroepsuitoefening (CKBU). 2021. Accessed 16 Dec 2021.
30. Hoffmann TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, et al. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ. 2014;348:g1687. [DOI] [PubMed]
31. WEBSITE Foundation. Public Pathology Database. 2019. Accessed 21 May 2019.
32. Penfold RB, Zhang F. Use of interrupted time series analysis in evaluating health care quality improvements. Acad Pediatr. 2013;13(6):S38–S44.
33. Bernal JL, Cummins S, Gasparrini A. Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: a tutorial. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46(1):348–355.
34. Bowen DJ, Kreuter M, Spring B, Cofta-Woerpel L, Linnan L, Weiner D, et al. How we design feasibility studies. Am J Prev Med. 2009;36(5):452–457.
35. Hulscher ME, Laurant MG, Grol RP. Process evaluation on quality improvement interventions. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12(1):40–46.
36. Cuble. Cuble. 2021. Accessed 23 Dec 2021.
37. Fan W, Yan Z. Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: a systematic review. Comput Human Behav. 2010;26(2):132–139.
38. Lankshear S, Srigley J, McGowan T, Yurcan M, Sawka C. Standardized synoptic cancer pathology reports - so what and who cares? A population-based satisfaction survey of 970 pathologists, surgeons, and oncologists. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137(11):1599–1602.
39. Hassell LA, Parwani AV, Weiss L, Jones MA, Ye J. Challenges and opportunities in the adoption of College of American Pathologists checklists in electronic format: perspectives and experience of Reporting Pathology Protocols Project (RPP2) participant laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(8):1152–1159.
40. Dutch Pathology Association (NVVP). SKMS kwaliteitsprojecten. 2021. Accessed 22 Dec 2021.
41. Torous VF, Allan RW, Balani J, Baskovich B, Birdsong GG, Dellers E. Exploring the College of American Pathologists Electronic Cancer Checklists: What they are and what they can do for you. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2021;145(4):392–8.
42. Dinmohamed AG, Visser O, Verhoeven RH, Louwman MW, van Nederveen FH, Willems SM, et al. Fewer cancer diagnoses during the COVID-19 epidemic in the Netherlands. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(6):750–751.
43. Kok G, Gottlieb NH, Peters GJY, et al. A taxonomy of behaviour change methods: an intervention mapping approach. Health Psychol Rev. 2016;10(3):297–312.
Article Sidebar
Published
Aug 10, 2022
Article Details
How to Cite
Dr. Hemalatha Surupanga. (2022). ENHANCING NATIONWIDE IMPLEMENTATION OF STANDARDIZED STRUCTURED REPORTING (SSR) IN PATHOLOGY: A MULTIFACETED DIGITAL STRATEGY FOR ONCOLOGY CARE. Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology, 29(03), 2164-2174. https://doi.org/10.53555/hk5tjc69
Section
Articles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Author Biography
Dr. Hemalatha Surupanga
Assistant Professor, Department of Pathology, Sri Lakshmi Narayana Institute of Medical Sciences & Hospital, Osudu, Agaram Village, Koodapakkam Post, Puducherry - 605502
How to Cite
Dr. Hemalatha Surupanga. (2022). ENHANCING NATIONWIDE IMPLEMENTATION OF STANDARDIZED STRUCTURED REPORTING (SSR) IN PATHOLOGY: A MULTIFACETED DIGITAL STRATEGY FOR ONCOLOGY CARE. Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology, 29(03), 2164-2174. https://doi.org/10.53555/hk5tjc69