Head and Neck Cancer in Belgium : Quality of Diagnostic Management and Variability Across Belgian Hospitals Between 2009 and 2014

11 pp.Aims: The study assessed the quality of diagnosis and staging offered to patients with a head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and the variability across Belgian hospitals. Methods: In total, 9,245 patients diagnosed with HNSCC between 2009 and 2014, were identified in the population-based Belgian Cancer Registry (BCR). The BCR data were coupled with other databases providing information on diagnostic and therapeutic procedures reimbursed by the compulsory health insurance, vital status data, and comorbidities. The use of diagnosis and staging procedures was assessed by four quality indicators (QI) (i.e., use of dedicated head and neck imaging studies, use of PET-CT, TNM reporting and interval between diagnosis and start of treatment), for which a target was defined before the analysis. The association between the binary QIs and observed survival was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for potential confounders. Results: Overall, 82.5% of patients received staging by MRI and/or CT of the head and neck region before the start of treatment. In 47.6% of stage III-IV patients eligible for treatment with curative intent, a whole-body FDG-PET(/CT) was performed. The proportion of patients whose cTNM and pTNM stage was reported to the BCR was 80.5 and 78.4%, respectively. The median interval from diagnosis to first treatment with curative intent was 32 days (IQR: 19-46). For none of these QIs the pre-set targets were reached and a substantial variability between centers was observed for all quality indicators. No binary QI was significantly associated with observed survival. Conclusions: The four quality indicators related to diagnosis and staging in HNSCC all showed substantial room for improvement. For none of them the pre-set targets were met at the national level and the variability between centers was substantial. Each Belgian hospital received an individual feedback report in order to stimulate reflection and quality improvement processes