Purpose:Timely lung cancer care has been associated with improved clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. We identified improvement opportunities in lung cancer management pathways at Kingston Health Sciences Centre. Quality improvement strategies led to the implementation of a multidisciplinary lung cancer clinic (MDC).Methods:We set an outcome measure of decreasing the time from diagnosis to first cancer treatment by 10 days within 6 months of clinic implementation. We implemented a weekly MDC that involved respirologists, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists at which patients with new lung cancer diagnoses were offered concurrent oncology consultation. We used Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles to guide our improvement initiatives. A total of five Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles spanned 14 months and consisted of an MDC pilot clinic, large-scale MDC launching, debriefing meetings, and clinic expansion. Pre-MDC data were analyzed retrospectively to establish baseline and prospectively for improvement. Stat...

Background: Lung cancer (LC) care is resource and cost intensive. We launched a Multidisciplinary LC Clinic (MDC), where patients with a new LC diagnosis received concurrent oncology consultation, resulting in improved time to LC assessment and treatment. Here, we evaluate the impact of MDC on health resource utilization, patient and caregiver costs, and secondary patient benefits. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients in a rapid assessment clinic with a new LC diagnosis pre-MDC (September 2016–February 2017) and post-MDC implementation (February 2017–December 2018). Data are reported as means; unpaired t-tests and ANOVA were used to assess for significance. We also conducted a cost analysis. Resource utilization, out-of-pocket costs, procedure-related costs, and indirect costs were evaluated from the societal perspective and presented in 2019 Canadian dollars (CAD); multi-way worst/best case and threshold sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: We reviewed 428 patients (78 traditional model, 350 MDC). Patients in the MDC model required significantly fewer oncology visits from LC diagnosis to first LC treatment (1.62 vs. 2.68, p < 0.001), which was significant for patients with stage 1, 3, and 4 disease. Compared with the traditional model, there was no change in mean biopsies/patient (1.32 traditional vs. 1.17 MDC, p = 0.18) or staging investigations/patient (2.24 traditional vs. 2.02 MDC, p = 0.20). Post-MDC, there was an increase in invasive mediastinal staging for patients with stage 2/3 LC (15.0% vs. 60.0%, p < 0.001). Over 22 months, MDC resulted in savings of CAD 48,389 including CAD 24,167 CAD in direct patient out-of-pocket expenses. For the threshold analyses, MDC was estimated to cost CAD 25,708 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), considered to be below current willingness to pay thresholds (at CAD 80,000 per QALY). MDC also facilitated oncology assessment for 29 non-LC patients. Conclusions: An MDC led to a reduction in patient visits and direct patient and caregiver costs.

Timely care for patients with lung cancer (LC) is associated with improved clinical outcomes. In Southeastern Ontario, Canada, we identified delays in the diagnostic process for patients undergoing evaluation for suspected LC through a rapid assessment clinic. We developed improvement initiatives with an aim of reducing the time from referral to diagnosis. A Standardized Triage Process (STP) was implemented for patients referred with suspected LC, including routine interdisciplinary triage, standardized pathways with preordered staging tests, and a new Small Nodule Clinic. We retrospectively analyzed all patients referred pre-STP (January to April 2018) and prospectively for improvement (May 2018 to March 2019). Process measures included STP compliance and time to completion of staging investigations (positron emission tomography [PET] and computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging of brain). Data are reported as means; significance was determined by special-cause variation using Statistical Process Control charts; unpaired t tests were compared between groups. We reviewed 833 referrals (207 baseline and 626 post-STP). STP compliance improved monthly to 99.4%. Post-STP, time from referral to PET decreased (from 38.5 to 15.7 days), time from referral to brain imaging decreased (from 33.4 to 13.1 days), and time from referral to diagnosis decreased (from 38.0 to 22.7 days), all demonstrating special-cause variation. Patients completing preordered staging tests experienced significantly faster care than those without preordered tests, including time to PET (23.0 v 35.9 days), computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging of brain (16.2 v 29.9 days), and diagnosis (39.9 v 28.1 days), all P < .001. An STP significantly improved timeliness of diagnosis and staging for patients with suspected LC undergoing evaluation in a rapid assessment clinic.

The novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has forced clinicians across Canada to abruptly adapt to a new reality of reduced contact with patients in ambulatory care settings. With minimal lead time, ambulatory clinics in Canada were required to adopt aggressive infection prevention and control measures while facing shortages of personal protective equipment and to enact strategies to urgently reorganize patient care. These adaptations included the conversion of ambulatory clinics to telephone or virtual care platforms. In 2015, the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) published pandemic influenza preparedness guidelines highlighting the importance of pandemic preparedness planning in primary and ambulatory care settings, including clinic continuity planning and provisions for non in-person care. Despite these recommendations, hospital-based ambulatory clinics lacked formal strategic plans to adapt patient care processes during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. Thus, in a short time frame, clinics individually adapted their own patient care processes. This creates the potential for gaps in quality of medical care for patients across Canada. In this report, we describe the evolution and operationalization of care planning in our hospital-based respirology clinic, highlight the challenges faced, and make recommendations for respirology clinic adaptations based on available guidance. This process may be used as a foundation to guide future policy, discussion and guidelines for hospital-based respiratory care to ensure optimal preparedness during the next inevitable respiratory viral pandemic or possible worsening of the current pandemic.