Abstract

36 Background: Evidence based guidelines pertaining to the management of bony metastases have been published. However, up to 30% of oncology treatments deviate from evidence based standards and widespread variations in clinical practice continue to exist. To explore patterns of care in the treatment of vertebral metastases in a group of working age, insured patients, we assessed treatment plans submitted for preauthorization through eviti Connect. Methods: Eviti Connect is a web-based application that enables oncology providers to obtain automated precertification for patients. The platform evaluates treatment plans for consistency with EBM and compliance with payer policies and plan language. All requests for radiation treatment submitted during a two year period from 6/1/11-5/31/13 were reviewed. Peer to peer discussions were conducted in cases that deviated from EBM. Results: A total of 229 cases for the treatment of vertebral metastases were submitted. 46/229 plans (19.8%) did not meet EBM standards. Some cases displayed more than one deviation. Reasons for non-compliance included atypical treatment schedules (8.69%), SRS/SBRT (36.9%), IMRT (32.6%), and IGRT (58.7%). In 26/46 cases (56.5%) the treating physician provided a medical rationale for the deviation. In 9 cases the physician altered the plan to be compliant; in 5 cases the physician did not agree to a change. The most common dose fractionation schedules were 30 Gy/10 fractions (48.9%) and 37.5 Gy/15 fractions (20.5%). 17 cases were treated using 20 Gy/5 fractions and only 2 cases were treated using 8 Gy X 1. Conclusions: Radiation of vertebral metastases was prescribed in accordance with EBM in the majority of cases. The main reasons for deviation were patient-specific issues that justified the medical necessity of the variance. Case review and peer to peer discussion contributed to understanding the rationale for treatment deviation from guidelines and allowed providers to bring plans into compliance with EBM. Overall only 5% of plans were non-evidence based or lacked a medical justification for deviation. Consistent with patterns of care across the US, within this group of patients, single fraction and hypofractionated radiation regimens were underutilized.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call