Danish cancer patients’ perspective on health care: results from a national survey

Sandager, Mette; Sperling, Cecilie Dyg; Jensen, Henry; Vinter, Mette Marianne; Knudsen, Janne Lehmann

doi:10.1007/s10111-014-0301-3

Cited by 12 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study is a cross‐sectional study based on data from two national questionnaire surveys among cancer patients and their GPs conducted in 2010 in Denmark. The identification of patients, data collection and drop‐out analyses have been reported in detail elsewhere (Jensen, Sperling, Sandager, & Vedsted, ; Jensen, Torring, Larsen, & Vedsted, ; Sandager, Sperling, Jensen, Jensen, & Knudsen, ; Sperling, Sandager, Jensen, & Knudsen, ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The questionnaire was developed to give a broad insight into the needs of cancer patients and their experiences with the health care system during diagnostics and treatment. The questionnaire was critically assessed by a professional advisory panel and further tested by cognitive interviews with 13 patients, who differed with regard to age, gender and diseases (Sandager et al, ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cancer patients’ experiences with urgent referrals to cancer patient pathways

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective We aimed to explore whether cancer patients urgently referred to a cancer patient pathway (CPP) (CPP referred) by a general practitioner report experiences of pre‐diagnosis cancer care differently than patients not referred to a CPP (non‐CPP referred). Methods Data were collected from cross‐sectional questionnaire surveys among cancer patients and their GPs and linked to National registries. Poisson regression was used to generate adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) to compare reported experiences. Results The study included 2,256 individuals. CPP referred patients reported more positive overall experiences of the pre‐diagnosis phase (p < 0.001). Overall, CPP referred patients were 21% more likely than non‐CPP referred patients to report a positive experience after adjustment for case‐mix, comorbidity, disposable household income and educational level (PR = 1.21 [95% CI: 1.11–1.30]). The difference decreased to 14% when adjusted for Quality Deviations (PR = 1.14 [95% CI: 1.06–1.23]) and to 11% when adjusted for diagnostic interval (PR = 1.11 [95% CI: 1.02–1.20]). Conclusion Our findings suggest that CPP referred cancer patients have better experiences of pre‐diagnosis cancer care compared to non‐CPP referred patients. A substantial part of the difference could be attributed to shorter diagnostic intervals and/or the absence of quality deviations among CPP patients, which reveals the potential for generally improving cancer patients’ experiences by seamless and optimised diagnostic pathways.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cancer patients’ experiences with urgent referrals to cancer patient pathways

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Family inclusion throughout the illness trajectory of patients suffering from severe or chronic conditions has received increased focus from European healthcare politicians and administrators (Vrangbaek, ), and inviting patients to give feedback on their experiences with health care is seen as an essential part of patient‐centred care (Sandager, Sperling, Jensen, Vinter, & Knudsen, ). Despite a long tradition of feedback from patients on the care they receive, a recent national survey among more than 150,000 patients who had been in contact with Danish hospitals in 2018 shows that 16% of the patients did not at all or to a less degree experience that the health professionals offer their relatives opportunities to participate in decisions about their care.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nurses' attitudes regarding the importance of families in nursing care: A cross‐sectional study

Østergaard

Clausen

Agerskov

et al. 2020

Journal of Clinical Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims and objectives To investigate attitudes towards family involvement in care among a broad sample of Danish nurses from all sectors and healthcare settings. Background Evidence suggests that nurses hold both supportive and less supportive attitudes about involvement of family members in the care of patients, and the existing findings are limited to specific healthcare contexts. Design A cross‐sectional study adhering to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology for reporting observational studies. Methods Using snowball sampling, the Families' Importance in Nursing Care‐Nurses' Attitudes questionnaire was initially administered to a broad, convenience sample of Danish registered nurses through social media: Facebook interest groups and the homepage of the Danish Family Nursing Association. These nurses were encouraged to send the invitation to participate in their network of nursing colleagues. Complete data sets from 1,720 nurses were available for analysis. Results In general, the nurses considered the family as important in patient care. Nurses who held master's and doctorate degrees scored significantly higher than nurses with a basic nursing education. Nurses who had had experience with illness within their own families tended to score higher on the family as a conversational partner subscale than those without this experience. Nurses with the longest engagement within hospital settings scored significantly lower than those with the longest engagement within primary health care and/or psychiatry. Conclusions Families are considered important in nursing care. Younger nurses with a basic education, short‐term engagement at a hospital and no experiences with illness within their own families were predictors of less supportive attitudes towards including the family in nursing care. Relevance to clinical practice Clinical leaders and managers should promote education on the importance of active family involvement in patient care in clinical practice and undergraduate education. More focus on collaboration with families in the hospital setting is needed.

show abstract

“…We used existing Danish patient experience surveys, as inspiration and as a first basis for creating the item wordings of PREM. 17 The questionnaire was pilot-tested through five individual interviews and two focus groups with 10 heart patients, based on cognitive interviewing techniques. 18 The questionnaire was further tested by two researchers with expertise in constructing surveys.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to measure experiences of healthcare quality in Denmark among patients with heart disease? The development and psychometric evaluation of a patient-reported instrument

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveMeasuring the quality of care as experienced by patients is increasingly recognised as a way of improving healthcare services. However, disease-specific measures that take the patient journey into account are needed. This paper presents the development of such a measure for patients with heart disease and details the psychometric evaluation.DesignThe questionnaire was developed based on a literature review, qualitative interviews and a pilot-test. The psychometric evaluation of the measure was assessed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and differential item functioning analysis with data from a population-based survey.SettingDenmark in 2013–2014.Study participantsNineteen heart patients, four relatives and eight health professionals participated in qualitative interviews in the development phase, and 15 patients participated in the pilot-test. The questionnaire was subsequently sent to a random sample of 5000 heart patients who were diagnosed in 2013.ResultsThe comprehensive development phase and pilot-testing contributed to high content validity of the questionnaire. Eligible questionnaire responses were received from 2496 patients. EFA indicated a nine-factor model: communication at the hospital, communication with the general practitioner, information on disease and treatment, information on psychosocial aspects, rehabilitation/support, organisation, medication, involvement of relatives and consideration of comorbidity. CFA confirmed the proposed factor structure (eg, goodness-of-fit index=0.88, adjusted goodness-of-fit index=0.86, root mean square error of approximation=0.05), and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient revealed good internal consistency of the factors (range: 0.69–0.93).ConclusionsThe results suggest that this disease-specific patient-reported experience measure is of good quality when measuring the quality of care among heart patients. The inclusion of patients in the development phase contributed to high content validity, and subsequent psychometric evaluation found high construct validity and internal consistency. This measure may be especially relevant when seeking information about which aspects of care require improvement and the impact on health outcomes.

show abstract

Danish cancer patients’ perspective on health care: results from a national survey

Cited by 12 publications

References 9 publications

Cancer patients’ experiences with urgent referrals to cancer patient pathways

Cancer patients’ experiences with urgent referrals to cancer patient pathways

Nurses' attitudes regarding the importance of families in nursing care: A cross‐sectional study

How to measure experiences of healthcare quality in Denmark among patients with heart disease? The development and psychometric evaluation of a patient-reported instrument

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About