OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of conducting a patient satisfaction survey in the oncology hospital setting, using a multidimensional patient satisfaction questionnaire to be completed at home. METHODS: Socio-demographic and clinical data were collected for 133 consecutive patients. Patients were asked to complete the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 (version 2.0) just before hospital discharge and the Comprehensive Assessment of Satisfaction with Care at home 2 weeks after discharge. RESULTS: Respondents (73% of patients approached) were younger, hospitalized for a shorter time and presented less appetite loss, nausea and vomiting and better physical and role functioning than non-responders. The aspects of care for which patients wanted the most improvement were associated with the provision of medical information. In multivariate analyses, longer hospital stay was associated with higher satisfaction with all aspects of medical and nursing care, most probably because patients discharged early were not assured of continuity of care and lacked information regarding self-care at home. Higher global quality of life was associated with higher satisfaction with all aspects of care, suggesting the potential contribution of patient satisfaction to the patients' well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting a patient satisfaction survey in an oncology hospital setting proved feasible; however, further surveys should attempt to obtain the opinion of patients with more severe physical conditions. The assessment of the patients' satisfaction provided indications for improvement of care in a particular hospital. Although the results of this study are specific to one hospital, the methods could be reproduced in other hospital settings, but may possibly lead to other conclusions. Copyright 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of conducting a patient satisfaction survey in the oncology hospital setting, using a multidimensional patient satisfaction questionnaire to be completed at home. METHODS: Socio-demographic and clinical data were collected for 133 consecutive patients. Patients were asked to complete the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 (version 2.0) just before hospital discharge and the Comprehensive Assessment of Satisfaction with Care at home 2 weeks after discharge. RESULTS: Respondents (73% of patients approached) were younger, hospitalized for a shorter time and presented less appetite loss, nausea and vomiting and better physical and role functioning than non-responders. The aspects of care for which patients wanted the most improvement were associated with the provision of medical information. In multivariate analyses, longer hospital stay was associated with higher satisfaction with all aspects of medical and nursing care, most probably because patients discharged early were not assured of continuity of care and lacked information regarding self-care at home. Higher global quality of life was associated with higher satisfaction with all aspects of care, suggesting the potential contribution of patient satisfaction to the patients' well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting a patient satisfaction survey in an oncology hospital setting proved feasible; however, further surveys should attempt to obtain the opinion of patients with more severe physical conditions. The assessment of the patients' satisfaction provided indications for improvement of care in a particular hospital. Although the results of this study are specific to one hospital, the methods could be reproduced in other hospital settings, but may possibly lead to other conclusions. Copyright 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel
Authors: Pascal Jean-Pierre; Kevin Fiscella; Karen M Freund; Jack Clark; Julie Darnell; Alan Holden; Douglas Post; Steven R Patierno; Paul C Winters Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-10-04 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Breffni Hannon; Nadia Swami; Monika K Krzyzanowska; Natasha Leighl; Gary Rodin; Lisa W Le; Camilla Zimmermann Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2013-02-23 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: H Geinitz; B Marten-Mittag; C Schäfer; G Henrich; I Bittner; P Herschbach; A Dinkel; S Sehlen Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Pascal Jean-Pierre; Kevin Fiscella; Paul C Winters; Electra Paskett; Kristen Wells; Tracy Battaglia Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2011-10-27 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Anne Brédart; Sylvie Dolbeault; Alexia Savignoni; Sébastien Simard; Stéphanie Gomme; Bernard Asselain; Laure Copel Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2009-04-03 Impact factor: 3.603