TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluating comprehensive cancer networks; a review of standards and evaluation methods for care networks to inform a comparison with the OECI comprehensive cancer network standards
AU - Wind, Anke
AU - Oberst, Simon
AU - Westerhuis, Willien
AU - Blaauwgeers, Harriet
AU - Sæter, Gunnar
AU - de Paoli, Paolo
AU - Nagy, Péter
AU - Burrion, Jean Benoit
AU - Jolly, Eva
AU - Lovey, József
AU - van Harten, Wim
N1 - Funding Information:
AW and SO received funding from the OECI. The authors acknowledge the work of the EU Joint Action on Rare Cancers workpackage 5, and in particular Annalisa Trama, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, IRCCS Milano; Simon Oberst, Organisation of European Cancer Institutes, Belgium; Claudio Lombardo, Organisation of European Cancer Institutes, Belgium; Harriet Blaauwgeers, Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland, Netherlands; Jan Maarten van der Zwan, Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland, Netherlands; Annemiek Kwast, Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland, Netherlands; Lucia da Pieve, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano, Italy; Riccardo Spizzo, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano, Italy; Tobias Janowitz, Cancer Research UK Centre, Cambridge, UK; Olga Kozhaeva, European Society for Paediatric Oncology–SIOPE
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2023/1/2
Y1 - 2023/1/2
N2 - Introduction: To ensure that all citizens have equal access to high-quality cancer diagnosis and care, the EU4Health Programme, Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, and Horizon Europe’s Cancer Mission propose Comprehensive Cancer Infrastructures in every European Union Member State. It is therefore important to establish the basic principles for high-performing cancer networks and a methodology for evaluating their quality and effectiveness. This article describes methods and standards/indicators for network evaluation found in literature, gives a comparative overview of the new OECI European Cancer Network Quality standards, and proposes principles for evaluating the performance of Comprehensive Cancer Networks as a basis for continuous improvement. Materials and Methods: We performed a scoping literature review on methods and standards/indicators for care-network evaluation. We then compared the OECI set with literature findings, categorised standards that were similar, reflected on standards that were different, and deduced principles for quality standards for cancer networks. Results: Of 1002 articles identified, 17 reported on evaluation methods and/or (mostly) qualitative indicators. Sixteen studies described indicators/standards for evaluating care networks, critical success factors or desirable outcomes. Of the 54 present OECI standards, 32 had a literature equivalent. No literature equivalent was found for 22 standards, especially on those related to the combination of care and research. The proposed OECI evaluation methods (survey, document review, and interviews) were all reported in the literature. From the conformity of these results, we deduced 8 principles for standards evaluating the effectiveness of Comprehensive Cancer Networks. Conclusions: Research on the evaluation of the effectiveness of care networks is scarce. Evaluation methods vary and are often single time-point assessments. The OECI set contributes to establishing clear principles and standards to evaluate the effectiveness of Comprehensive Cancer Networks.
AB - Introduction: To ensure that all citizens have equal access to high-quality cancer diagnosis and care, the EU4Health Programme, Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, and Horizon Europe’s Cancer Mission propose Comprehensive Cancer Infrastructures in every European Union Member State. It is therefore important to establish the basic principles for high-performing cancer networks and a methodology for evaluating their quality and effectiveness. This article describes methods and standards/indicators for network evaluation found in literature, gives a comparative overview of the new OECI European Cancer Network Quality standards, and proposes principles for evaluating the performance of Comprehensive Cancer Networks as a basis for continuous improvement. Materials and Methods: We performed a scoping literature review on methods and standards/indicators for care-network evaluation. We then compared the OECI set with literature findings, categorised standards that were similar, reflected on standards that were different, and deduced principles for quality standards for cancer networks. Results: Of 1002 articles identified, 17 reported on evaluation methods and/or (mostly) qualitative indicators. Sixteen studies described indicators/standards for evaluating care networks, critical success factors or desirable outcomes. Of the 54 present OECI standards, 32 had a literature equivalent. No literature equivalent was found for 22 standards, especially on those related to the combination of care and research. The proposed OECI evaluation methods (survey, document review, and interviews) were all reported in the literature. From the conformity of these results, we deduced 8 principles for standards evaluating the effectiveness of Comprehensive Cancer Networks. Conclusions: Research on the evaluation of the effectiveness of care networks is scarce. Evaluation methods vary and are often single time-point assessments. The OECI set contributes to establishing clear principles and standards to evaluate the effectiveness of Comprehensive Cancer Networks.
KW - accreditation
KW - Care Networks
KW - European Union
KW - evaluation
KW - quality improvement
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85148307428
U2 - 10.1080/0284186X.2023.2170275
DO - 10.1080/0284186X.2023.2170275
M3 - Article
C2 - 36786345
AN - SCOPUS:85148307428
SN - 0284-186X
VL - 62
SP - 15
EP - 24
JO - Acta oncologica
JF - Acta oncologica
IS - 1
ER -