DOI 10.1097/jxx.0000000000001118
Improving cervical cancer screening rates at a Federally Qualified Health Center.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer in women. Early detection with screening methods can help to prevent mortality.
LOCAL PROBLEM: Cervical cancer screening is below national standards at a Midwest Federally Qualified Health Center and may compromise future funding. A manual chart review of cervical cancer screening was compared with an electronic health record-generated report and found results from outside facilities accounted for 27% of the metric's underperformance. This quality improvement project aimed to improve the Uniform Data System performance for cervical cancer screening at a specific health center from 46.3% to 79.2% by July 2024.
METHODS
Implementation, guided by the Improvement Model and Lewin's Change Theory, included (1) analysis of cervical cancer screening underperformance, (2) sharing data with key stakeholders, and (3) creating tip sheets for chart reconciliation.
INTERVENTIONS: Interventions consisted of (1) auditing and reconciling charts from Epic's generated reports, (2) modifying the frequency of or discontinuing Pap smears, (3) updating surgical history to reflect hysterectomy type, and (4) sending scheduling outreach messages.
RESULTS
As of March 2024, cervical cancer screening 2023 percentages increased by ≥9% for each quarter and by 8.7% for year-to-date at the Midwest health center. The quality metric's quarter 1 and 2, 2024 data increased by 4% and 3% as of July 2024.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the target goal was not reached in the designated time frame, the percentage increase proves that implementation of a chart reconciliation workflow can improve rates for cervical cancer screening at a Federally Qualified Health Center.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.