质量控制指标（QCIs）可以用来客观评估泌尿学家和中心遵循指导方针和质量基准的情况。使用经过前瞻性登记的经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术（TURBT）程序记录的六个QCIs来评估非肌层侵犯性膀胱癌（NMIBC）的情况。在2013年至2017年期间，通过电子病历报告表（eCRFs）在三个中心前瞻性收集了TURBT病例的临床数据。病理学数据是回顾性收集的。排除了T0疾病或先前T2疾病的患者。我们评估了六个QCIs：完全切除（CR）状态，膀胱肌层（DM）的存在，反复TURBT，单次注射丝裂霉素C（MMC），卡介苗治疗开始，和诊断后≤6周的治疗。我们评估了关于QCIs的报告质量和QCIs的遵从度，比较了中心和时间之间的遵从度差异，并研究了遵从度和无复发生存率（RFS）之间的关系。共收集了1350个TURBT程序的数据，其中包括907名独特患者的1151个程序。TURBT后的欧洲泌尿学协会风险类别分别为低危271例，中危464例，高危416例。两个QCIs的报告质量不佳，其中DM为35％，BCG为51％。 CR的遵从度为97％，DM为31％，MMC为65％，重新TURBT为33％，BCG为39％，从诊断后≤6周的治疗遵从度为88％。各QCIs的遵从度在中心之间有显着差异。MMC和重新TURBT的遵从度随时间显着增加，这可以归因于一个中心。MMC的遵从度与RFS显着相关。主要研究局限在于病理学数据的回顾性收集。使用eCRFs组成的TURBT登记表收集病理学和结果数据，评估NMIBC的QCIs是可行的。我们的研究说明了这种方法在实际情况中的可行性。中心之间QCIs表现的差异可以激励泌尿学家改善其对NMIBC患者的日常护理，从而改善临床结果。我们的研究表明，可以使用电子病历评估非肌层侵犯性膀胱癌的治疗的质量控制指标。我们评估了比利时三个中心在2013和2017年间收治的907名患者中进行的1151次摘除膀胱肿瘤的手术的结果。 QCIs的遵从度在中心之间存在差异，随时间增加，并与疾病的复发相关。 版权所有 © 2022 Elsevier B.V.发表。

Quality control indicators (QCIs) can be used to objectively evaluate guideline adherence and benchmark quality among urologists and centers.To assess six QCIs for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) using a prospective registry of transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) procedures.Clinical data for TURBT cases were prospectively collected using electronic case report forms (eCRFs) embedded in the electronic medical record in three centers during 2013-2017. Pathological data were collected retrospectively. Patients with T0 disease or prior T2 disease were excluded.We assessed six QCIs: complete resection (CR) status, presence of detrusor muscle (DM), re-TURBT, single instillation of mitomycin C (MMC), start of bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) therapy, and therapy ≤6 wk after diagnosis. We assessed the quality of reporting on QCIs and compliance with QCIs, compared compliance between centers and over time, and investigated correlation between compliance and recurrence-free survival (RFS).Data for 1350 TURBT procedures were collected, of which 1151 were included for 907 unique patients. The distribution of European Association of Urology risk categories after TURBT was 271 with low risk, 464 with intermediate risk, and 416 with high risk. The quality of reporting for two QCIs was suboptimal, at 35% for DM and 51% for BCG. QCI compliance was 97% for CR, 31% for DM, 65% for MMC, 33% for re-TURBT, 39% for BCG, and 88% for therapy ≤6 wk after diagnosis. Compliance with all QCIs differed significantly among centers. Compliance with MMC and re-TURBT increased significantly over time, which could be attributed to one center. Compliance with MMC was significantly correlated with RFS. The main study limitation is the retrospective collection of pathology data.A TURBT registry consisting of eCRFs to collect pathology and outcome data allowed assessment of QCIs for NMIBC. Our study illustrates the feasibility of this approach in a real-life setting. Differences in performance on QCIs among centers can motivate urologists to improve their day-to-day care for patients with NMIBC, and can thus improve clinical outcomes.Our study demonstrates that quality control indicators for treatment of bladder cancer not invading the bladder muscle can be evaluated using electronic medical records. We assessed results for 1151 procedures in 907 individual patients to remove bladder tumors between 2013 and 2017 at three centers in Belgium. Compliance with the quality control indicators differed between centers, increased over time, and was correlated with recurrence of disease.Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.