Cancer Commissioning Toolkit Peer Review Content

1
Cancer Commissioning ToolkitPeer Review Content
2
Peer Review Content CCT

• 2 Quality of Service
• 2.1 Key Issues Peer Review
• All MDT Measures
• MDT Core Membership Measures
• Named Core Team Members
• Core Team Members Present at Meeting
• Commissioning Measures
• Network User Group

3
Peer Review Content CCT

• 4 Assessment, Diagnosis and Staging
• 4.1 Peer Review
• Pathology Services Compliance with 3D Measures
• Imaging Services Compliance with 3B Measures

4
Peer Review Content CCT

• 5 Treatment
• 5.2 Radiotherapy
• Performance
• Radiotherapy Compliance with 3E Measures
• 5.4 Cancer Medicines
• Quality
• Chemotherapy Compliance with 3C-1 Measures
• Chemotherapy Compliance with 3C-2 Measures
• Chemotherapy Compliance with 3C-3 Measures

5
Peer Review Content CCT

• 7 Living with Cancer
• 7.1 Living with Cancer
• Patient Experience
• Palliative Care
• Specialist Palliative Care Compliance with 3A
  Measures
• Network Palliative Care Group Compliance with
  1E-1 Measures

6
Quality of service
7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
Assessment, diagnosis and staging
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
Future of Peer Review
17
What Needs to Change

• Needs to increasingly become a mechanism which
  supports quality assurance processes within teams
  and organisations, rather than being an
  externally driven activity
• Need to ensure that information is up to date and
  reflects changes made and action plans
  implemented
• An increasing focus on self assessments supported
  by a process of validation and targeted visits
  will support the shift in organisational culture

18
Proposed Process

• Self Assessment
• Internal Validation
• External Verification (Sample)
• Peer Review Visit (Targeted)

19
New Self Assessment Process
20
Key Questions for MDTs

• Can you demonstrate that you have a properly
  constituted and functioning MDT?
• Can you demonstrate that you have effective
  systems for providing coordinated care to
  individual patients?
• Can you demonstrate that your team has adequate
  information to help it improve service delivery?
• Can you demonstrate how you are continuously
  improving clinical effectiveness and the patient
  experience?

21
Evidence

• All teams to submit three documents as part of
  self-assessment
• e.g. MDT to submit operational policy, activity
  report and work-programme
• Living documents not just produced to satisfy
  peer review.
• Evidence Guides will help teams link these three
  documents to individual measures

22
Advantages of Proposed Changes

• Comprehensive, benchmarked information, enriched
  by clinical data and annually updated, will be
  available to support choice, voice,
  commissioning, regulation and governance
• A continuous approach to improving quality rather
  than wait for the next visit
• Promotes local system management responses rather
  than external intervention
• Maintains benefits of visits but focused on
  topics of greatest need
• Makes variations in service visible