Article Text

Download PDFPDF

EPV184/#232 An overview of gynecological oncology clinical quality registries worldwide
  1. N Baldewpersad Tewarie1,
  2. M Wouters2,
  3. W Van Driel3,
  4. M Van Ham1,
  5. R Rome4,
  6. E Pagano5,
  7. C Høgdall6,
  8. T Hogberg7 and
  9. R Kruitwagen8
  1. 1Radboud UMC, Gynecology, Nijmegen, Netherlands
  2. 2Netherlands Cancer Insitute, Surgical Oncology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
  3. 3Netherlands Cancer Insitute, Gynecology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
  4. 4Epworth Healthcare, Epworth Freemasons Hospital, East Melbourne, Australia
  5. 5Citta della Salute, Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Pienmonte, Italy
  6. 6University of Copenhagen, Gynecology, Copenagen, Denmark
  7. 7Lund university, Medical Oncology, Lund, Sweden
  8. 8Maastricht University Medical Centre, Gynecology, Maastricht, Netherlands


Objectives Clinical outcomes have become more important over the past years, Clinical Quality Registries (CQR’s) were initiated in order to compare clinical outcomes between hospitals or regions within a country. The aim of this study was to identify CQR’s for gynecological oncology and to summarize their characteristics, processes, and quality indicators (QI) in order to establish whether it is feasible to make an international comparison in the future.

Methods To identify CQR’s in gynecological oncology a literature search in Pubmed was performed. All papers describing the use of a CQR were selected and analyzed. For the purpose of this paper, the task force or contact person of these registries were approached to participate in order to collect information on registered items, processes, and indicators.

Results Five nations with CQR’s agreed to collaborate: Australia, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden. Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden established a nationwide registry, collecting data on multiple tumor types, and reporting various QI’s. Australia and Italy registered and reported on patients with ovarian cancer only. All nations had a different process to report the results to the participating hospitals.

Conclusions This review of CQR’s on gynecological malignancies shows that different methods and processes exist. Registries serve the same purpose to improve quality of care but vary in reporting for one or more tumor types. In order to compare the care for these patients on an international level, it would be useful to harmonize these registries, set an international standard to measure the quality of care, and select similar indicators.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.