Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Formal indicators for the evaluation of the quality of melanoma care are needed. We identified 13 process indicators, which encompassed early diagnosis, pathology reporting and surgical treatment. We evaluated the adherence to these indicators using a population-based series on incident skin melanomas (only primary melanomas) for the year 2004 (687 cases) and for the first semester of 2008 (539 cases). We compared the indicators for these 2 years. The melanoma incidence increased between 2004 and 2008. There were statistically significant increases in the percentage of thin (≤1 mm) melanomas (from 50.7 to 61.3%) and in the number of pathology reports that mentioned ulceration (from 61.4 to 84.6%) and margin status (from 76.8 to 84.3%). The percentage of patients staged by sentinel lymph node biopsy was stable (63%) and was higher for patients younger than 75 years of age (74%). The number of nodes almost invariably exceeded the proposed site-specific cutoff reference and, in 2008, the number of nodes removed was always reported for lymphadenectomy. From 2004 to 2008, surgical and pathological waiting times increased. Collection and analysis of these indicators would enable continuous evaluation of the quality of melanoma care in Tuscany and provide sources for a comparative study between Italy and elsewhere.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Crocetti et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: