Literature DB >> 19685032

[Treatment of rectal carcinoma: satisfaction of general practitioners with surgical clinics].

K-P Braun1, V Braun, S Brookman-Amissah, M May, H Ptok, H Lippert, I Gastinger.   

Abstract

AIM: The present study aimed to analyze the satisfaction of referring general practitioners with the surgical departments concerned with further treatment of patients regarding cooperation and therapeutic results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 442 general practitioners were interviewed about a total of 601 patients by a standardized questionnaire. The return rate was 63.1% and 73.4% of questionnaires could be analyzed. The study group (SG) comprised 265 patients with rectal carcinoma, who were treated by 204 general practitioners and in 17 different hospitals. The mean age at the time of surgery was 67.8 years.
RESULTS: The oncological result represented the decisive the crucial criterion regarding therapeutic satisfaction of the general practitioners. Postoperative erectile function was the least satisfying parameter, although its priority was considerably more dispensable than the oncological result. Regarding cooperation with the hospital, the content of the epicrisis was the most satisfying parameter. The value of a sufficient and furthermore contemporarily forwarded epicrisis was categorized as very important.
CONCLUSION: Telephone availability, waiting period until in-patient admission and content of the epicrisis were assessed positively. The main point of criticism was the timely receipt of the epicrisis. The surgical expertise regarding the treatment of rectal carcinoma was assessed as the main quality parameter of the hospital.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19685032     DOI: 10.1007/s00104-009-1766-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chirurg        ISSN: 0009-4722            Impact factor:   0.955


  8 in total

1.  The increasing importance of patient surveys. Now that sound methods exist, patient surveys can facilitate improvement.

Authors:  P D Cleary
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-18

2.  [Quality assurance study of rectal cancer].

Authors:  P Lippert; I Gastinger; F Marusch; A Kock
Journal:  Zentralbl Chir       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 0.942

3.  A preliminary survey of oncologists' perceptions of quality of life information.

Authors:  A Bezjak; P Ng; K Taylor; K MacDonald; A D Depetrillo
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.894

4.  [Referrer satisfaction as a quality criterion: developing an questionnaire for measuring the quality of services provided by a radiology department].

Authors:  R A Kubik-Huch; M Rexroth; R Porst; L Dürselen; R Otto; T Szucs
Journal:  Rofo       Date:  2005-03

Review 5.  Impact of quality of life outcomes on clinical practice.

Authors:  P A Ganz
Journal:  Oncology (Williston Park)       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 2.990

6.  Impact of functional results on quality of life after rectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  Jaana H Vironen; Matti Kairaluoma; Anna-Mari Aalto; Ilmo H Kellokumpu
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  Quality of life after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

Authors:  M P Gosselink; J J Busschbach; C M Dijkhuis; L P Stassen; W C Hop; W R Schouten
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.788

Review 8.  Quality of life assessment in palliative care.

Authors:  I G Finlay; R Dunlop
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 32.976

  8 in total
  1 in total

1.  Improving quality of medical treatment and care: are surgeons' working conditions and job satisfaction associated to patient satisfaction?

Authors:  Stefanie Mache; Karin Vitzthum; Burghard F Klapp; David A Groneberg
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 3.445

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.