What does satisfaction with wait times mean to cancer patients?

Mathews, Maria; Ryan, Dana; Bulman, Donna

doi:10.1186/s12885-015-2041-z

Cited by 38 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The responses to the items above reflect important decision points associated with satisfaction with expectations of final treatment effects. Previous research has shown that financial burden had a negative effect on patients’ perspectives of their healthcare27 and that timelines were the most influential determinant of these perspectives28 and accessibility 16 29…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of patient experience profiles and satisfaction with expectations of treatment effects by using latent class analysis based on a national patient experience survey in Taiwan

Chiou

Lee

Chang³

et al. 2019

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesHealth system responsiveness is a complicated issue that guides researchers wishing to design an efficient methodology for enhancing understanding of perspectives regarding healthcare systems. This study examined the relationship between patient experience profiles and satisfaction with expectations of treatment effects.DesignThis was a cross-sectional study. We used eight items obtained from latent class analysis to develop patient experience profiles.SettingPrimary care users in Taiwan.ParticipantsThis study conducted an annual National Health Insurance survey in Taiwan and sampled from those who had experience with the medical service in primary care clinics in 2015.Primary outcome measureRespondents were asked to indicate the extent of their satisfaction with their expectation of treatment effects (or symptom improvement).ResultsThe proportions of participants in groups 1–4 were 34%, 24%, 29% and 12%, respectively. Patients in good health were more satisfied with their expectations of treatment effects (OR 1.639, p=0.007). Furthermore, group 4 (-eAll) were less satisfied with their expectations of treatment effects than those in the other three groups (ORs: group 1 (+eAll): 9.81, group 2 (-CwR): 4.14 and group 3 (-CnR): 4.20).ConclusionsThe results revealed that experiences of poor accessibility and physician–patient relationships affected the patients’ expectations. Therefore, greater accessibility and more positive physician–patient relationships could lead to higher patient satisfaction with their expectations of treatment effects. Furthermore, the findings could assist authorities in targeting specific patients, with the objective of improving their healthcare service experience. They could also serve as a mechanism for improving the quality of healthcare services and increase accountability in healthcare practices.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of patient experience profiles and satisfaction with expectations of treatment effects by using latent class analysis based on a national patient experience survey in Taiwan

Chiou

Lee

Chang³

et al. 2019

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Patient satisfaction is an important goal for health care services, as both an indicator of service quality and as an influence on subsequent service utilization [1][2][3][4][5]. Increasing patient satisfaction with care delivery may thus provide a means for improving engagement in and outcomes of care delivery [6] and was designated by the American Cancer Society's Patient Navigation Leadership Summit as one of the key metrics for evaluating patient navigation programs [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Increasing health service access by expanding disease coverage and adding patient navigation: challenges for patient satisfaction

Schutt¹,

Woodford²

2020

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Cancer control programs have added patient navigation to improve effectiveness in underserved populations, but research has yielded mixed results about their impact on patient satisfaction. This study focuses on three related research questions in a U.S. state cancer screening program before and after a redesign that added patient navigators and services for chronic illness: Did patient diversity increase; Did satisfaction levels improve; Did socioeconomic characteristics or perceived barriers explain improved satisfaction. Methods: Representative statewide patient samples were surveyed by phone both before and after the program design. Measures included satisfaction with overall health care and specific services, as well as experience of eleven barriers to accessing health care and self-reported health and sociodemographic characteristics. Multiple regression analysis is used to identify independent effects.Results: After the program redesign, the percentage of Hispanic and African American patients increased by more than 200% and satisfaction with overall health care quality rose significantly, but satisfaction with the program and with primary program staff declined. Sociodemographic characteristics explained the apparent program effects on overall satisfaction, but perceived barriers did not. Further analysis indicates that patients being seen for cancer risk were more satisfied if they had a patient navigator. Conclusions:Health care access can be improved and patient diversity increased in public health programs by adding patient navigators and delivering more holistic care. Effects on patient satisfaction vary with patient health needs, with those being seen for chronic illness likely to be less satisfied with their health care than those being seen for cancer risk. It is important to use appropriate comparison groups when evaluating the effect of program changes on patient satisfaction and to consider establishing appropriate satisfaction benchmarks for patients being seen for chronic illness.

show abstract

“…Research suggests that increased time from diagnosis to first appointment may correlate with decreased disease‐free and overall survival, especially among patients with late‐stage breast cancer 6‐10 . Moreover, increased pre‐operative wait times have been shown to increase patient anxiety and decrease patient satisfaction 11,12 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of patient factors with time to treatment for breast cancer

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Studies have shown that in the United States, there is an increasing time from breast cancer diagnosis to first treatment (time to treatment or “TTT”), with concern that such delays may worsen oncologic outcomes. A component of TTT is the time from the initial diagnosis to initial surgical consultation (SC). We sought to identify patient‐related factors associated with time to initial SC, and evaluate how this interval is associated with overall total time to treatment (TTT). Methods A prospective database of women diagnosed with breast cancer at our institution from 2015 to 2016 was reviewed. Time from initial breast cancer diagnosis to SC and overall TTT was collected from the electronic medical record. Documented patient‐identified preferences regarding scheduling the first surgical appointment were reviewed. A multivariate analysis was performed to determine clinical and patient factors associated with TTT. Results Of 553 breast cancer patients included in the study, 27% of women opted for the earliest appointment while 73% chose a later date. The median time from diagnosis to SC was 8.5 ± 4.7 days. Patients who accepted a first available SC waited an average of 5.6 ± 3.4 days, while those who deferred waited 9.5 ± 4.6 days (P < .001). Patients who deferred the earliest available SC were older, with a median age of 67 versus 63 years, (P = .018), and had a preference for a specific location in the geographical hospital region (P = .003). Patients who deferred the first available SC also had a longer TTT (33 vs. 28 days, P = .027). Discussion Among newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, there is a substantial population that defers the first available SC. These patients are also more likely to have a prolonged TTT. Future follow‐up of this cohort is necessary to determine the delays on TTT affect cancer outcomes and overall survival.

show abstract

What does satisfaction with wait times mean to cancer patients?

Cited by 38 publications

References 23 publications

Assessment of patient experience profiles and satisfaction with expectations of treatment effects by using latent class analysis based on a national patient experience survey in Taiwan

Assessment of patient experience profiles and satisfaction with expectations of treatment effects by using latent class analysis based on a national patient experience survey in Taiwan

Increasing health service access by expanding disease coverage and adding patient navigation: challenges for patient satisfaction

Association of patient factors with time to treatment for breast cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About