Locations:
Search IconSearch

Accreditation Ensures Multidisciplinary Approach, Consistent High Standards in Rectal Cancer Care on National Scale

A Q&A with Drs. Matthew Kalady and Steven Wexner

18-DDI-5519-Rectal-Cancer-Hero-Image-650x450pxl

The National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer (NAPRC) recently awarded its first accreditations to four of the nation’s top colorectal cancer programs, including the Cleveland Clinic Colorectal Cancer Program and the Cleveland Clinic Florida Colorectal Cancer Program.

Advertisement

Cleveland Clinic is a non-profit academic medical center. Advertising on our site helps support our mission. We do not endorse non-Cleveland Clinic products or services. Policy

NAPRC accreditation – by the Commission on Cancer (CoC), a quality program of the American College of Surgeons – “is granted only to those programs that … undergo a rigorous evaluation and review of [their] performance and compliance with established NAPRC Standards,” according to the NAPRC.

Consult QD talked with colorectal surgeons Matthew Kalady, MD, Vice Chairman of Colorectal Surgery and Co-Director of the Comprehensive Colorectal Cancer Program, and Steven Wexner, MD, Director of the Digestive Disease Center and Chairman of Colorectal Surgery at Cleveland Clinic Florida and Past President of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, about what the accreditation program means to patients and clinicians.

Q: How did the NAPRC accreditation process and its focus on multidisciplinary care change care delivery at Cleveland Clinic?

Dr. Kalady: We’ve long been a champion of multidisciplinary care with multiple specialties, with team agreement on optimal treatment plans. So, not much has changed in our daily practice. However, the accreditation affirms that we are consistent with best practices and helps us ensure that every single patient gets this standard of care.

We know outcomes are better at accredited centers for other conditions such as breast cancer, bariatric surgery and trauma. I think ultimately patients are going to seek care in centers that are accredited.

Q: How are patients benefiting from this standard of care, specifically?

Dr. Wexner: The multidisciplinary approach and standardization remove personal prejudices that aren’t evidence-based. We think about a patient not just as surgeons or just as oncologists but collectively as members of a team. We achieve a better result when multiple minds are set to it, as research has shown that better approaches are found, irrespective of the experience of the surgeon. The wisdom of the group supersedes our individual opinions.

Advertisement

Dr. Kalady and our colleagues in Ohio proved this point. There are distinct benefits for patients when you consider the wisdom of the crowd. That’s number one. We are giving patients the greatest possible chance of surviving without a recurrence and without a colostomy.

Number two, it’s continuous learning for all the clinicians. When our specimens are put on a big screen and discussed among 40 or 50 people every week, we’ll naturally get much better. The collaborative teamwork among surgery, pathology, radiology, medical oncology and radiation oncology ultimately benefits our patients.

Dr. Kalady: We have emphasized efficiency of appointments and decreasing time to starting treatment. This process has pushed us to arrange clinic visits with multiple specialties on the same day and in the same space. After a complete evaluation is done, patients know that all the results are then discussed at our weekly cancer team meeting, and then the consensus recommendation is discussed with the patient. Patients really like the idea of getting the timely opinion of a full team.

Clinicians like it, too, because we all want to do the best for our patients and this gives us the opportunity to continuously improve what we’re doing. The medical community knows that six or seven years of effort went into this program, and it may well be a template for other cancers.

Advertisement

Related Articles

Doctor talking with patient
Consider Risk Factors When Deciding Care Path for Postoperative Crohn’s Disease

Strong patient communication can help clinicians choose the best treatment option

Federico Aucejo, MD
February 7, 2024/Digestive/Transplant
New Research Indicates Liver Transplant, Resection as an Option for Patients with CRLM

ctDNA should be incorporated into care to help stratify risk pre-operatively and for post-operative surveillance

Impostor phenomenon
February 6, 2024/Digestive/Research
Recognizing the Impact of Impostor Phenomenon and Microaggressions in Gastroenterology

The importance of raising awareness and taking steps to mitigate these occurrences

Koji Hashimoto, MD, and team
February 2, 2024/Digestive/Research
Combined Cardiac Surgery and Liver Transplant Is a New Option for Highly Selected Patients

New research indicates feasibility and helps identify which patients could benefit

Ajita Prabhu, MD
January 29, 2024/Digestive/Case Study
Case Study: Repair Surgery for Patient with Hernia and Abdominal Damage

Treating a patient after a complicated hernia repair led to surgical complications and chronic pain

liver
December 8, 2023/Digestive/Research
MILU Improves Outcomes Among Critically Ill Patients with Advanced Liver Disease

Standardized and collaborative care improves liver transplantations

alcohol
November 17, 2023/Digestive/Research
Younger Patients with Alcohol-Associated Hepatitis Present to the ED More Often, Research Shows

Caregiver collaboration and patient education remain critical

Ad