M Mathews1, D Ryan1, V Gadag1, R West1. 1. Division of Community Health and Humanities, Memorial University, St. John's, NL.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding factors relating to the perception of wait time by patients is key to improving the patient experience. METHODS: We surveyed 122 breast and 90 prostate cancer patients presenting at clinics or listed on the cancer registry in Newfoundland and Labrador and reviewed their charts. We compared the wait time (first visit to diagnosis) and the wait-related satisfaction for breast and prostate cancer patients who received regular screening tests and whose cancer was screening test-detected ("screen/screen"); who received regular screening tests and whose cancer was symptomatic ("screen/symptomatic"); who did not receive regular screening tests and whose cancer was screen test-detected ("no screen/screen"); and who did not receive regular screening tests and whose cancer was symptomatic ("no screen/symptomatic"). RESULTS: Although there were no group differences with respect to having a long wait (greater than the median of 47.5 days) for breast cancer patients (47.8% screen/screen, 54.7% screen/symptomatic, 50.0% no screen/ screen, 40.0% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.814), a smaller proportion of the screen/symptomatic patients were satisfied with their wait (72.5% screen/ screen, 56.4% screen/symptomatic, 100% no screen/ screen, 90.9% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.048). A larger proportion of screen/symptomatic prostate cancer patients had long waits (>104.5 days: 41.3% screen/screen, 92.0% screen/symptomatic, 46.0% no screen/screen, 40.0% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.011) and a smaller proportion of screen/ symptomatic patients were satisfied with their wait (71.2% screen/screen, 30.8% screen/symptomatic, 76.9% no screen/screen, 90.9% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis-related wait times and satisfaction were poorest among patients who received regular screening tests but whose cancer was not detected by those tests.
BACKGROUND: Understanding factors relating to the perception of wait time by patients is key to improving the patient experience. METHODS: We surveyed 122 breast and 90 prostate cancerpatients presenting at clinics or listed on the cancer registry in Newfoundland and Labrador and reviewed their charts. We compared the wait time (first visit to diagnosis) and the wait-related satisfaction for breast and prostate cancerpatients who received regular screening tests and whose cancer was screening test-detected ("screen/screen"); who received regular screening tests and whose cancer was symptomatic ("screen/symptomatic"); who did not receive regular screening tests and whose cancer was screen test-detected ("no screen/screen"); and who did not receive regular screening tests and whose cancer was symptomatic ("no screen/symptomatic"). RESULTS: Although there were no group differences with respect to having a long wait (greater than the median of 47.5 days) for breast cancerpatients (47.8% screen/screen, 54.7% screen/symptomatic, 50.0% no screen/ screen, 40.0% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.814), a smaller proportion of the screen/symptomatic patients were satisfied with their wait (72.5% screen/ screen, 56.4% screen/symptomatic, 100% no screen/ screen, 90.9% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.048). A larger proportion of screen/symptomatic prostate cancerpatients had long waits (>104.5 days: 41.3% screen/screen, 92.0% screen/symptomatic, 46.0% no screen/screen, 40.0% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.011) and a smaller proportion of screen/ symptomatic patients were satisfied with their wait (71.2% screen/screen, 30.8% screen/symptomatic, 76.9% no screen/screen, 90.9% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis-related wait times and satisfaction were poorest among patients who received regular screening tests but whose cancer was not detected by those tests.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer screening; breast cancer; patient satisfaction; prostate cancer; wait times
Authors: H Satoh; H Ishikawa; Y T Yamashita; T Naito; H Takahashi; H Kamma; Y Saito; M Ohtsuka; S Hasegawa Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 1997 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: Eliney F Faria; Gustavo F Carvalhal; René A Vieira; Thiago B Silva; Edmundo C Mauad; Marcos Tobias-Machado; André L Carvalho Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2011-08-16 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Alexandre E Pelzer; Daniela Colleselli; Jasmin Bektic; Georg Schaefer; Stefano Ongarello; Christian Schwentner; Leo Pallwein; Michael Mitterberger; Eberhard Steiner; Georg Bartsch; Wolfgang Horninger Journal: BJU Int Date: 2008-03-13 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Alexandre E Pelzer; Daniela Colleselli; Jasmin Bektic; Georg Schaefer; Stefano Ongarello; Christian Schwentner; Fritz Aigner; Michael Mitterberger; Eberhard Steiner; Georg Bartsch; Wolfgang Horninger Journal: BJU Int Date: 2008-01-10 Impact factor: 5.588