Skip to main content
NCBI home page
British Journal of Cancer logoLink to British Journal of Cancer
. 1997;75(11):1652–1659. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1997.281

Breast cancer management: is volume related to quality? Clinical Advisory Panel.

M Ma 1, J Bell 1, S Campbell 1, I Basnett 1, A Pollock 1, I Taylor 1
PMCID: PMC2223536  PMID: 9184182

Abstract

A method of carrying out region-wide audit for breast cancer was developed by collaboration between the cancer registry, providers and purchasers as part of work to fulfill the 'Calman-Hine' recommendations. In order to test the audit method, a retrospective audit in North Thames East compared practice in 1992 against current guidelines. The analysis compared care in specialist and non-specialist centres. A stratified random sample comprising 28% of all breast cancer patients diagnosed in 1992 was selected from the population-based Thames Cancer Registry. The data for 309 patients with stage I-III tumours were analysed by hospital type using local guidelines. No difference between specialist (high volume) and non-specialist centres was detected for factors important in survival. Pathological staging was good with over 70% reporting tumour size and grade. A small number of patients were undertreated; after conservative surgery, 10% (19) of women did not receive radiotherapy, and 15% (8) of node-positive premenopausal women did not receive chemotherapy or ovarian ablation. In contrast, a significant trend with hospital volume was found for several quality of life factors. These included access to a specialist breast surgeon and specialist breast nurses, availability of fine-needle aspiration (FNA), which ranged from 84% in high-volume to 42% in low-volume centres, and quality of surgery (axillary clearance rates ranged from 51% to 8% and sampling of less than three nodes from 3% to 25% for high- and very low-volume centres respectively). Confidential feedback of results to surgeons was welcomed and initiated change. The summary information gave purchasers information relevant to the evaluation of cancer services. While the audit applied present standards to past practice, it provided the impetus for prospective audit of current practice (now being implemented in North Thames).

Full text

PDF
1652

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Basnett I., Gill M., Tobias J. S. Variations in breast cancer management between a teaching and a non-teaching district. Eur J Cancer. 1992;28A(12):1945–1950. doi: 10.1016/0959-8049(92)90233-r. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Chouillet A. M., Bell C. M., Hiscox J. G. Management of breast cancer in southeast England. BMJ. 1994 Jan 15;308(6922):168–171. doi: 10.1136/bmj.308.6922.168. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Davies H. T., Crombie I. K. Assessing the quality of care. BMJ. 1995 Sep 23;311(7008):766–766. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7008.766. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Gillis C. R., Hole D. J. Survival outcome of care by specialist surgeons in breast cancer: a study of 3786 patients in the west of Scotland. BMJ. 1996 Jan 20;312(7024):145–148. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7024.145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Greco P. J., Eisenberg J. M. Changing physicians' practices. N Engl J Med. 1993 Oct 21;329(17):1271–1273. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199310213291714. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Grimshaw J. M., Russell I. T. Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a systematic review of rigorous evaluations. Lancet. 1993 Nov 27;342(8883):1317–1322. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)92244-n. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Haines A., Jones R. Implementing findings of research. BMJ. 1994 Jun 4;308(6942):1488–1492. doi: 10.1136/bmj.308.6942.1488. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Richards M. A., Wolfe C. D., Tilling K., Barton J., Bourne H. M., Gregory W. M. Variations in the management and survival of women under 50 years with breast cancer in the South East Thames region. Br J Cancer. 1996 Mar;73(6):751–757. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1996.131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Sainsbury R., Haward B., Rider L., Johnston C., Round C. Influence of clinician workload and patterns of treatment on survival from breast cancer. Lancet. 1995 May 20;345(8960):1265–1270. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(95)90924-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Sainsbury R., Rider L., Smith A., MacAdam A. Does it matter where you live? Treatment variation for breast cancer in Yorkshire. The Yorkshire Breast Cancer Group. Br J Cancer. 1995 Jun;71(6):1275–1278. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1995.246. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Watson J. D., Sainsbury J. R., Dixon J. M. ABC of breast diseases. Breast reconstruction after surgery. BMJ. 1995 Jan 14;310(6972):117–121. doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6972.117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from British Journal of Cancer are provided here courtesy of Cancer Research UK

RESOURCES