Skip to main content

The AHRQ National Quality Measures Clearinghouse (NQMC, qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov) Web site will not be available after July 16, 2018 because federal funding
through AHRQ will no longer be available to support the NQMC as of that date. For additional information, read our full announcement.
  • Measure Summary
  • NQMC:003766
  • Sep 2010

Oncology: percentage of patients, regardless of age, with a diagnosis of cancer who have undergone brachytherapy or external beam radiation therapy who have a treatment summary report in the chart that was communicated to physician(s) providing continuing care and to the patient within one month completing treatment.

American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement®. Oncology physician performance measurement set. Chicago (IL): American Medical Association (AMA); 2010 Sep. 47 p. [15 references]

This is the current release of the measure.

The measure developer reaffirmed the currency of this measure in January 2017.

  • Save

Primary Measure Domain

Clinical Quality Measures: Process

Secondary Measure Domain

Does not apply to this measure

Description

This measure is used to assess the percentage of patients, regardless of age, with a diagnosis of cancer who have undergone brachytherapy or external beam radiation therapy who have a treatment summary report in the chart that was communicated to physician(s) providing continuing care and to the patient within one month completing treatment.

Rationale

Timely, accurate, and effective communications are critical to quality and value in contemporary medical practices. As both a consultant oncologist and the provider of radiation oncology services, the radiation oncologist has a dual role. Radiation therapy incorporates the science of complex, integrated treatment delivery and the art of individual cancer management. Through written focused reports and direct communications, the contribution of radiation oncologists concerning patient care, responsible utilization, and quality are provided, especially to primary care physicians, other oncologists and specialists, and allied healthcare providers (nurses, tumor registrars, quality assurance personnel, third-party reviewers, etc).* (American College of Radiology [ACR])

*The following clinical recommendation statements are quoted verbatim from the referenced clinical guidelines and represent the evidence base for the measure:

A summary should be generated that accurately describes the treatment process, the doses delivered to the target/tumor volume and other key organs, relevant assessment of tolerance to and progress towards the treatment goals, and subsequent care plans. The style will reflect the radiation oncologist's individual practice convention and the referral provider's needs. The style, content, and detail of this summary must be tailored to the clinical setting and prevailing practice norms. It should contain elements that accurately and succinctly reflect the program of care administered in a language understandable to the nonradiation oncologist. It is suggested that, the report to the referring physician include a request for periodic updates on the patient's progress. These updates will facilitate continuity of care should the patient require further radiation therapy. (ACR)

Evidence for Rationale

American College of Radiology (ACR). ACR practice guideline for communication: radiation oncology. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology (ACR); 2004. 6 p. [10 references]

American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement®. Oncology physician performance measurement set. Chicago (IL): American Medical Association (AMA); 2010 Sep. 47 p. [15 references]

Primary Health Components

Cancer; brachytherapy; external beam radiation therapy; treatment summary

Denominator Description

All patients, regardless of age, with a diagnosis of cancer who have undergone brachytherapy or external beam radiation therapy (see the related "Denominator Inclusions/Exclusions" field)

Numerator Description

Patients who have a treatment summary report in the chart that was communicated to the physician(s) providing continuing care and to the patient within one month of completing treatment (see the related "Numerator Inclusions/Exclusions" field)

Type of Evidence Supporting the Criterion of Quality for the Measure

  • A clinical practice guideline or other peer-reviewed synthesis of the clinical research evidence

Additional Information Supporting Need for the Measure

Unspecified

Extent of Measure Testing

Unspecified

State of Use

Current routine use

Current Use

Care coordination

Internal quality improvement

Professional certification

Measurement Setting

Ambulatory/Office-based Care

Ambulatory Procedure/Imaging Center

Hospital Outpatient

Transition

Type of Care Coordination

Coordination across provider teams/sites

Professionals Involved in Delivery of Health Services

Physicians

Least Aggregated Level of Services Delivery Addressed

Individual Clinicians or Public Health Professionals

Statement of Acceptable Minimum Sample Size

Does not apply to this measure

Target Population Age

All patients, regardless of age

Target Population Gender

Either male or female

National Quality Strategy Aim

Better Care

National Quality Strategy Priority

Effective Communication and Care Coordination
Person- and Family-centered Care
Prevention and Treatment of Leading Causes of Mortality

IOM Care Need

Getting Better

Living with Illness

IOM Domain

Effectiveness

Patient-centeredness

Case Finding Period

Unspecified

Denominator Sampling Frame

Patients associated with provider

Denominator (Index) Event or Characteristic

Clinical Condition

Therapeutic Intervention

Denominator Time Window

Does not apply to this measure

Denominator Inclusions/Exclusions

Inclusions
All patients, regardless of age, with a diagnosis of cancer who have undergone brachytherapy or external beam radiation therapy

Exclusions

  • Documentation of a patient reason(s) for not communicating the treatment summary report to the physician(s) providing continuing care (e.g., patient requests that report not be sent) and to the patient within one month of completing treatment
  • Documentation of a system reason(s) for not communicating the treatment summary report to the physician(s) providing continuing care (e.g., patient does not have any physician responsible for providing continuing care) and to the patient within one month of completing treatment

Exclusions/Exceptions

Patient factors addressed

System factors addressed

Numerator Inclusions/Exclusions

Inclusions
Patients who have a treatment summary* report in the chart that was communicated to the physician(s) providing continuing care and to the patient within one month of completing treatment

*Treatment Summary: A report that includes mention of all of the following components: 1) dose delivered; 2) relevant assessment of tolerance to and progress towards the treatment goals; and 3) subsequent care plans.

Exclusions
None

Numerator Search Strategy

Fixed time period or point in time

Data Source

Administrative clinical data

Electronic health/medical record

Paper medical record

Type of Health State

Does not apply to this measure

Instruments Used and/or Associated with the Measure

Unspecified

Measure Specifies Disaggregation

Does not apply to this measure

Scoring

Rate/Proportion

Interpretation of Score

Desired value is a higher score

Allowance for Patient or Population Factors

Unspecified

Standard of Comparison

Internal time comparison

Original Title

Measure #6: treatment summary communication - radiation oncology.

Measure Collection Name

Oncology

Submitter

American Society for Radiation Oncology - Medical Specialty Society

Developer

American Society for Radiation Oncology - Medical Specialty Society

American Society of Clinical Oncology - Medical Specialty Society

Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® - Clinical Specialty Collaboration

Funding Source(s)

Unspecified

Composition of the Group that Developed the Measure

Patricia Ganz, MD (Co-Chair); James Hayman, MD (Co-Chair); Joseph Bailes, MD; Nancy Baxter, MD, PhD; Joel V. Brill, MD; Steven B. Clauser, PhD; Charles Cleeland, PhD; J. Thomas Cross, Jr. MD, MPH; Chaitanya R. Divgi, MD; Stephen B. Edge, MD; Patrick L. Fitzgibbons, MD; Sue Frechette; Myron Goldsmith, MD; Joel W. Goldwein, MD; Alecia Hathaway, MD, MPH; Kevin P. Hubbard, DO; Nora Janjan, MD, MPSA; Maria Kelly, MB, BCh; Wayne Koch, MD; Andre Konski, MD; Len Lichtenfeld, MD; Norman J. Marcus, MD; Catherine Miyamoto, RN, BSN; Michael Neuss, MD; Jean Owen, PhD; David F. Penson, MD, MPH; Louis Potters, MD; John M. Rainey, MD; Christopher M. Rose, MD; Lee Smith, MD; Lawrence A. Solberg, MD, PhD; Paul E. Wallner, MD; J. Frank Wilson, MD; Rodger Winn, MD

American Society for Radiation Oncology: Dave Adler; Robyn Watson, PhD; Emily Wilson

American Society of Clinical Oncologists: Pamela Kadlubek, MPH; Kristen McNiff, MPH; Julia Tompkins

American College of Radiation Oncology: Jennifer Dreyfus

American College of Surgeons: Julie Lewis

American Medical Association: Joseph Gave, MPH; Kendra Hanley, MS, CHE; Erin O. Kaleba, MPH; Karen Kmetik, PhD

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service: Tiffany Sanders, MD

College of American Pathologists Staff: Fay Shamanski, PhD

Consumer Representative: Catherine D. Harvey, Dr.PH

Health Plan Representative: Ranae Dahlberg

Consortium Consultant: Rebecca Kresowik; Timothy Kresowik, MD

National Committee for Quality Assurance: Donna Pillittere

National Comprehensive Cancer Network: Joan McClure, MS

Financial Disclosures/Other Potential Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts, if any, are disclosed in accordance with the Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® conflict of interest policy.

Adaptation

This measure was not adapted from another source.

Date of Most Current Version in NQMC

2010 Sep

Measure Maintenance

Unspecified

Date of Next Anticipated Revision

Unspecified

Measure Status

This is the current release of the measure.

The measure developer reaffirmed the currency of this measure in January 2017.

Source(s)

American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement®. Oncology physician performance measurement set. Chicago (IL): American Medical Association (AMA); 2010 Sep. 47 p. [15 references]

Measure Availability

Source not available electronically.

For more information, contact the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) at 8280 Willow Oaks Corporate Drive, Suite 500, Fairfax, VA 22031; Phone: 703-502-1550; Fax: 703-502-7852; Web site: www.astro.org External Web Site Policy.

NQMC Status

This NQMC summary was completed by ECRI Institute on September 8, 2008. The information was verified by the measure developer on October 16, 2008.

This NQMC summary was edited by ECRI Institute on September 28, 2009.

This NQMC summary was retrofitted into the new template on June 7, 2011.

This NQMC summary was edited again by ECRI Institute on April 27, 2012.

The information was reaffirmed by the measure developer on January 30, 2017.

Copyright Statement

This NQMC summary is based on the original measure, which is subject to the measure developer's copyright restrictions.

For more information, contact the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) at 8280 Willow Oaks Corporate Drive, Suite 500, Fairfax, VA 22031; Phone: 703-502-1550; Fax: 703-502-7852; Web site: www.astro.org External Web Site Policy.

NQMC Disclaimer

The National Quality Measures Clearinghouse™ (NQMC) does not develop, produce, approve, or endorse the measures represented on this site.

All measures summarized by NQMC and hosted on our site are produced under the auspices of medical specialty societies, relevant professional associations, public and private organizations, other government agencies, health care organizations or plans, individuals, and similar entities.

Measures represented on the NQMC Web site are submitted by measure developers, and are screened solely to determine that they meet the NQMC Inclusion Criteria.

NQMC, AHRQ, and its contractor ECRI Institute make no warranties concerning the content or its reliability and/or validity of the quality measures and related materials represented on this site. Moreover, the views and opinions of developers or authors of measures represented on this site do not necessarily state or reflect those of NQMC, AHRQ, or its contractor, ECRI Institute, and inclusion or hosting of measures in NQMC may not be used for advertising or commercial endorsement purposes.

Readers with questions regarding measure content are directed to contact the measure developer.

About NQMC Measure Summaries

NQMC provides structured summaries containing information about measures and their development.

Measure Summary FAQs


Measure Summaries

New This Week

View more and sign up for our Newsletter

Get Adobe Reader