Adherence to Measuring What Matters Items When Caring for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies Versus Solid Tumors

Thomas W. LeBlanc, Christine S. Ritchie, Fred Friedman, Janet Bull, Jean S. Kutner, Kimberly S. Johnson, Arif H. Kamal, Rebecca A. Aslakson, Katherine Ast, Ronit Elk, Kimberly K. Garner, Robert Gramling, Corita Grudzen, Sangeeta Lamba, Ramona L. Rhodes, Eric Roeland, Dena Schulman-Green, Kathleen Unroe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Context Measuring What Matters (MWM) prioritizes quality measures in palliative care practice. Hematologic malignancy patients are less likely to access palliative care, yet little is known about their unique needs. Differences in MWM adherence may highlight opportunities to improve palliative care in hematology. Objectives To assess adherence to MWM measures by palliative care clinicians caring for patients with hematologic malignancies, compared to those with solid tumors. Methods We used the Quality Data Collection Tool to assess completion of MWM measures across nine sites. Results We included data from 678 patients' first visits and various care settings; 64 (9.4%) had a hematologic malignancy, whereas 614 (90.6%) had a solid tumor. Hematology patients were more likely to be seen in a hospital (52 or 81.3% vs. 420 or 68%), whereas solid tumor patients were more frequently seen at home or in clinics (160 or 26% vs. 7 or 10.9%). Of the nine MWM measures we assessed, high adherence (>90%) was seen regardless of tumor type in measures #3 (Pain Treatment), #7 (Spiritual Concerns), #8 (Treatment Preferences), and #9 (Care Consistent With Preferences). Clinicians seeing hematology patients were significantly less likely to meet measures #2 (Screening for Physical Symptoms; 57.8% vs. 84.2%, P < 0.001), and #5 (Discussion of Emotional Needs; 56.3% vs. 70.0%, P = 0.03). Conclusion MWM adherence regarding symptom assessment and meeting emotional needs was lower for patients with hematologic malignancies compared to those with solid tumors. This finding suggests two key areas for quality improvement initiatives in palliative care for patients with hematologic malignancies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)775-782
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Pain and Symptom Management
Volume52
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2016

Fingerprint

Hematologic Neoplasms
Palliative Care
Neoplasms
Hematology
Symptom Assessment
Quality Improvement
Pain
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • blood cancers
  • collaboratives
  • hematologic malignancies
  • Hematology
  • Measuring What Matters
  • palliative care
  • QDACT
  • quality
  • quality measures

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

Adherence to Measuring What Matters Items When Caring for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies Versus Solid Tumors. / LeBlanc, Thomas W.; Ritchie, Christine S.; Friedman, Fred; Bull, Janet; Kutner, Jean S.; Johnson, Kimberly S.; Kamal, Arif H.; Aslakson, Rebecca A.; Ast, Katherine; Elk, Ronit; Garner, Kimberly K.; Gramling, Robert; Grudzen, Corita; Lamba, Sangeeta; Rhodes, Ramona L.; Roeland, Eric; Schulman-Green, Dena; Unroe, Kathleen.

In: Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, Vol. 52, No. 6, 01.12.2016, p. 775-782.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

LeBlanc, TW, Ritchie, CS, Friedman, F, Bull, J, Kutner, JS, Johnson, KS, Kamal, AH, Aslakson, RA, Ast, K, Elk, R, Garner, KK, Gramling, R, Grudzen, C, Lamba, S, Rhodes, RL, Roeland, E, Schulman-Green, D & Unroe, K 2016, 'Adherence to Measuring What Matters Items When Caring for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies Versus Solid Tumors', Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 775-782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.09.004
LeBlanc, Thomas W. ; Ritchie, Christine S. ; Friedman, Fred ; Bull, Janet ; Kutner, Jean S. ; Johnson, Kimberly S. ; Kamal, Arif H. ; Aslakson, Rebecca A. ; Ast, Katherine ; Elk, Ronit ; Garner, Kimberly K. ; Gramling, Robert ; Grudzen, Corita ; Lamba, Sangeeta ; Rhodes, Ramona L. ; Roeland, Eric ; Schulman-Green, Dena ; Unroe, Kathleen. / Adherence to Measuring What Matters Items When Caring for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies Versus Solid Tumors. In: Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. 2016 ; Vol. 52, No. 6. pp. 775-782.
@article{0f6a86354e6249ea9af21cbce0948e5f,
title = "Adherence to Measuring What Matters Items When Caring for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies Versus Solid Tumors",
abstract = "Context Measuring What Matters (MWM) prioritizes quality measures in palliative care practice. Hematologic malignancy patients are less likely to access palliative care, yet little is known about their unique needs. Differences in MWM adherence may highlight opportunities to improve palliative care in hematology. Objectives To assess adherence to MWM measures by palliative care clinicians caring for patients with hematologic malignancies, compared to those with solid tumors. Methods We used the Quality Data Collection Tool to assess completion of MWM measures across nine sites. Results We included data from 678 patients' first visits and various care settings; 64 (9.4{\%}) had a hematologic malignancy, whereas 614 (90.6{\%}) had a solid tumor. Hematology patients were more likely to be seen in a hospital (52 or 81.3{\%} vs. 420 or 68{\%}), whereas solid tumor patients were more frequently seen at home or in clinics (160 or 26{\%} vs. 7 or 10.9{\%}). Of the nine MWM measures we assessed, high adherence (>90{\%}) was seen regardless of tumor type in measures #3 (Pain Treatment), #7 (Spiritual Concerns), #8 (Treatment Preferences), and #9 (Care Consistent With Preferences). Clinicians seeing hematology patients were significantly less likely to meet measures #2 (Screening for Physical Symptoms; 57.8{\%} vs. 84.2{\%}, P < 0.001), and #5 (Discussion of Emotional Needs; 56.3{\%} vs. 70.0{\%}, P = 0.03). Conclusion MWM adherence regarding symptom assessment and meeting emotional needs was lower for patients with hematologic malignancies compared to those with solid tumors. This finding suggests two key areas for quality improvement initiatives in palliative care for patients with hematologic malignancies.",
keywords = "blood cancers, collaboratives, hematologic malignancies, Hematology, Measuring What Matters, palliative care, QDACT, quality, quality measures",
author = "LeBlanc, {Thomas W.} and Ritchie, {Christine S.} and Fred Friedman and Janet Bull and Kutner, {Jean S.} and Johnson, {Kimberly S.} and Kamal, {Arif H.} and Aslakson, {Rebecca A.} and Katherine Ast and Ronit Elk and Garner, {Kimberly K.} and Robert Gramling and Corita Grudzen and Sangeeta Lamba and Rhodes, {Ramona L.} and Eric Roeland and Dena Schulman-Green and Kathleen Unroe",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.09.004",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "52",
pages = "775--782",
journal = "Journal of Pain and Symptom Management",
issn = "0885-3924",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Adherence to Measuring What Matters Items When Caring for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies Versus Solid Tumors

AU - LeBlanc, Thomas W.

AU - Ritchie, Christine S.

AU - Friedman, Fred

AU - Bull, Janet

AU - Kutner, Jean S.

AU - Johnson, Kimberly S.

AU - Kamal, Arif H.

AU - Aslakson, Rebecca A.

AU - Ast, Katherine

AU - Elk, Ronit

AU - Garner, Kimberly K.

AU - Gramling, Robert

AU - Grudzen, Corita

AU - Lamba, Sangeeta

AU - Rhodes, Ramona L.

AU - Roeland, Eric

AU - Schulman-Green, Dena

AU - Unroe, Kathleen

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - Context Measuring What Matters (MWM) prioritizes quality measures in palliative care practice. Hematologic malignancy patients are less likely to access palliative care, yet little is known about their unique needs. Differences in MWM adherence may highlight opportunities to improve palliative care in hematology. Objectives To assess adherence to MWM measures by palliative care clinicians caring for patients with hematologic malignancies, compared to those with solid tumors. Methods We used the Quality Data Collection Tool to assess completion of MWM measures across nine sites. Results We included data from 678 patients' first visits and various care settings; 64 (9.4%) had a hematologic malignancy, whereas 614 (90.6%) had a solid tumor. Hematology patients were more likely to be seen in a hospital (52 or 81.3% vs. 420 or 68%), whereas solid tumor patients were more frequently seen at home or in clinics (160 or 26% vs. 7 or 10.9%). Of the nine MWM measures we assessed, high adherence (>90%) was seen regardless of tumor type in measures #3 (Pain Treatment), #7 (Spiritual Concerns), #8 (Treatment Preferences), and #9 (Care Consistent With Preferences). Clinicians seeing hematology patients were significantly less likely to meet measures #2 (Screening for Physical Symptoms; 57.8% vs. 84.2%, P < 0.001), and #5 (Discussion of Emotional Needs; 56.3% vs. 70.0%, P = 0.03). Conclusion MWM adherence regarding symptom assessment and meeting emotional needs was lower for patients with hematologic malignancies compared to those with solid tumors. This finding suggests two key areas for quality improvement initiatives in palliative care for patients with hematologic malignancies.

AB - Context Measuring What Matters (MWM) prioritizes quality measures in palliative care practice. Hematologic malignancy patients are less likely to access palliative care, yet little is known about their unique needs. Differences in MWM adherence may highlight opportunities to improve palliative care in hematology. Objectives To assess adherence to MWM measures by palliative care clinicians caring for patients with hematologic malignancies, compared to those with solid tumors. Methods We used the Quality Data Collection Tool to assess completion of MWM measures across nine sites. Results We included data from 678 patients' first visits and various care settings; 64 (9.4%) had a hematologic malignancy, whereas 614 (90.6%) had a solid tumor. Hematology patients were more likely to be seen in a hospital (52 or 81.3% vs. 420 or 68%), whereas solid tumor patients were more frequently seen at home or in clinics (160 or 26% vs. 7 or 10.9%). Of the nine MWM measures we assessed, high adherence (>90%) was seen regardless of tumor type in measures #3 (Pain Treatment), #7 (Spiritual Concerns), #8 (Treatment Preferences), and #9 (Care Consistent With Preferences). Clinicians seeing hematology patients were significantly less likely to meet measures #2 (Screening for Physical Symptoms; 57.8% vs. 84.2%, P < 0.001), and #5 (Discussion of Emotional Needs; 56.3% vs. 70.0%, P = 0.03). Conclusion MWM adherence regarding symptom assessment and meeting emotional needs was lower for patients with hematologic malignancies compared to those with solid tumors. This finding suggests two key areas for quality improvement initiatives in palliative care for patients with hematologic malignancies.

KW - blood cancers

KW - collaboratives

KW - hematologic malignancies

KW - Hematology

KW - Measuring What Matters

KW - palliative care

KW - QDACT

KW - quality

KW - quality measures

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85002941127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85002941127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.09.004

DO - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.09.004

M3 - Article

VL - 52

SP - 775

EP - 782

JO - Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

JF - Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

SN - 0885-3924

IS - 6

ER -