Advance Approval of Outpatient Chemotherapy via Phone Call Optimizes Healthcare Delivery without Compromising Patient Satisfaction with Care
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Self-Administered Questionnaire
2.3. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Population Characteristics
3.2. Patients’ Satisfaction
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Crow, R.; Gage, H.; Hampson, S.; Hart, J.; Kimber, A.; Storey, L.; Thomas, H. The measurement of satisfaction with healthcare: Implications for practice from a systematic review of the literature. Health Technol. Assess 2002, 6, 1–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dennison, C.R. The role of patient-reported outcomes in evaluating the quality of oncology care. Am. J. Manag. Care 2002, 8, S580–S586. [Google Scholar]
- Jha, A.K.; Orav, E.J.; Zheng, J.; Epstein, A.M. Patients’ perception of hospital care in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 2008, 359, 1921–1931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jayadevappa, R.; Schwartz, J.S.; Chhatre, S.; Wein, A.J.; Malkowicz, S.B. Satisfaction with care: A measure of quality of care in prostate cancer patients. Med. Decis. Mak. 2010, 30, 234–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gupta, D.; Rodeghier, M.; Lis, C.G. Patient satisfaction with service quality in an oncology setting: Implications for prognosis in non-small cell lung cancer. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 2013, 25, 696–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kennedy, G.D.; Tevis, S.E.; Kent, K.C. Is there a relationship between patient satisfaction and favorable outcomes? Ann. Surg. 2014, 260, 592–598; discussion 598–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Xesfingi, S.; Vozikis, A. Patient satisfaction with the healthcare system: Assessing the impact of socio-economic and healthcare provision factors. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2016, 16, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Brédart, A.; Coens, C.; Aaronson, N.; Chie, W.-C.; Efficace, F.; Conroy, T.; Blazeby, J.; Hammerlid, E.; Costantini, M.; Joly, F.; et al. Determinants of patient satisfaction in oncology settings from European and Asian countries: Preliminary results based on the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 questionnaire. Eur. J. Cancer 2007, 43, 323–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quintana, J.M.; González, N.; Bilbao, A.; Aizpuru, F.; Escobar, A.; Esteban, C.; San-Sebastián, J.A.; De-La-Sierra, E.; Thompson, A. Predictors of patient satisfaction with hospital health care. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2006, 6, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lin, C.T.; Albertson, G.A.; Schilling, L.M.; Cyran, E.M.; Anderson, S.N.; Ware, L.; Anderson, R.J. Is patients’ perception of time spent with the physician a determinant of ambulatory patient satisfaction? Arch. Intern. Med. 2001, 161, 1437–1442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, J.Y.; Tao, M.L.; Tisnado, D.; Malin, J.; Ko, C.; Timmer, M.; Adams, J.L.; Ganz, P.A.; Kahn, K.L. Impact of physician-patient discussions on patient satisfaction. Med. Care 2008, 46, 1157–1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Sandoval, G.A.; Brown, A.D.; Sullivan, T.; Green, E. Factors that influence cancer patients’ overall perceptions of the quality of care. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 2006, 18, 266–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Säilä, T.; Mattila, E.; Kaila, M.; Aalto, P.; Kaunonen, M. Measuring patient assessments of the quality of outpatient care: A systematic review. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2008, 14, 148–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aboumater, H.J.; Winner, L.E.; Davis, R.O.; Trovitch, P.B.; Berg, M.M.; Violette, K.M.; Messersmith, W.A.; Maylor, K.K.; Lehmann, C.U. No time to waste: Decreasing patient wait times for chemotherapy administration using automated prioritization in an oncology pharmacy system. Am. J. Manag. Care 2008, 14, 309–316. [Google Scholar]
- Brédart, A.; Razavi, D.; Delvaux, N.; Goodman, V.; Farvacques, C.; Van Heer, C. A comprehensive assessment of satisfaction with care for cancer patients. Support. Care Cancer 1998, 6, 518–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hendershot, E.; Murphy, C.; Doyle, S.; Van-Clieaf, J.; Lowry, J.; Honeyford, L. Outpatient chemotherapy administration: Decreasing wait times for patients and families. J. Pediatr. Oncol. Nurs. 2005, 22, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lis, C.G.; Rodeghier, M.; Gupta, D. Distribution and determinants of patient satisfaction in oncology: A review of the literature. Patient Prefer. Adherence 2009, 3, 287–304. [Google Scholar] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Brédart, A.; Bottomley, A.; Blazeby, J.; Conroy, T.; Coens, C.; D’Haese, S.; Chie, W.-C.; Hammerlid, E.; Arraras, J.; Efficace, F.; et al. An international prospective study of the EORTC cancer in-patient satisfaction with care measure (EORTC IN-PATSAT32). Eur. J. Cancer 2005, 41, 2120–2131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horowitz, M.; Wilner, N.; Alvarez, W. Impact of Event Scale: A Measure of Subjective Stress. Psychosom. Med. 1979, 41, 209–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Anderson, R.T.; Camacho, F.T.; Balkrishnan, R. Willing to wait?: The influence of patient wait time on satisfaction with primary care. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2007, 7, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bleustein, C.; Rothschild, D.B.; Valen, A.; Valatis, E.; Schweitzer, L.; Jones, R. Wait times, patient satisfaction scores, and the perception of care. Am. J. Manag. Care 2014, 20, 393–400. [Google Scholar]
- Weaver, A.; Young, A.M.; Rowntree, J.; Townsend, N.; Pearson, S.; Smith, J.; Gibson, O.; Cobern, W.; Larsen, M.; Tarassenko, L. Application of mobile phone technology for managing chemotherapy-associated side-effects. Ann. Oncol. 2007, 18, 1887–1892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kroenke, K.; Theobald, D.; Wu, J.; Norton, K.; Morrison, G.; Carpenter, J.; Tu, W. Effect of telecare management on pain and depression in patients with cancer: A randomized trial. JAMA 2010, 304, 163–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kondo, S.; Shiba, S.; Udagawa, R.; Ryushima, Y.; Yano, M.; Uehara, T.; Asanabe, M.; Tamura, K.; Hashimoto, J. Assessment of adverse events via a telephone consultation service for cancer patients receiving ambulatory chemotherapy. BMC Res. Notes 2015, 8, 315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Zylla, D.M.; Gilmore, G.E.; Steele, G.L.; Eklund, J.P.; Wood, C.M.; Stover, A.M.; Shapiro, A.C. Collection of electronic patient-reported symptoms in patients with advanced cancer using Epic MyChart surveys. Support. Care Cancer 2020, 28, 3153–3163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Soh, T.I.; Tan, Y.S.; Hairom, Z.; Ibrahim, M.; Yao, Y.; Wong, Y.P.; Lim, S.W.; Lim, S.E.; Goh, B.C.; Tan, C.S. Improving wait times for elective chemotherapy through pre-preparation: A quality-improvement project at the national university cancer institute of Singapore. J. Oncol. Pract. 2015, 11, e89–e94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Scotte, F.; Oudard, S.; Aboudagga, H.; ElAidi, R.; Bonan, B. A practical approach to improve safety and management in chemotherapy units based on the PROCHE—Programme for optimisation of the chemotherapy network monitoring program. Eur. J. Cancer 2013, 49, 541–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bonan, B.; Martelli, N.; Berhoune, M.; Vidal, L.-A.; Sahin, E.; Prognon, P. FabAct®: A decision-making tool for the anticipation of the preparation of anticancer drugs. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2010, 16, 1129–1135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dos Santos, M.; Lequesne, J.; Dugué, A.E.; Grellard, J.-M.; Grellard, C.; Jaffré, S.; Lavergne, K.; Lelaidier, A.; Laroche, L.; Divanon, F.; et al. Optimisation of chemotherapy prescription in an ambulatory unit: Validation of the OPTIMA program. Eur. J. Cancer Care 2019, 28, e13015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coriat, R.; Boudou-Rouquette, P.; Durand, J.-P.; D’Arc, P.F.; Martin, I.; Mir, O.; Ropert, S.; Alexandre, J.; Goldwasser, F. Cost Effectiveness of Integrated Medicine in Patients With Cancer Receiving Anticancer Chemotherapy. J. Oncol. Pract. 2012, 8, 205–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cox, K.; Wilson, E. Follow-up for people with cancer: Nurse-led services and telephone interventions. J. Adv. Nurs. 2003, 43, 51–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lynch, M.P.; Marcone, D.; King, J. Chemotherapy follow-up in older adults: Results of a quality-improvement project. Clin. J. Oncol. Nurs. 2010, 14, 619–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Variables | All Patients N = 233 | Control n = 129 | Intervention n = 104 | p | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | n (%) | N | n (%) | N | n (%) | ||
Age | |||||||
27–47 years | 233 | 36 (15.5) | 129 | 18 (13.9) | 104 | 18 (17.3) | 0.570 |
48–68 years | 148 (63.5) | 81 (62.8) | 67 (64.4) | ||||
69–85 years | 49 (21.0) | 30 (23.3) | 19 (18.3) | ||||
Marital status | |||||||
Living with a partner | 222 | 132 (59.5) | 123 | 80 (65.0) | 99 | 52 (52.5) | 0.059 |
Single | 90 (40.5) | 43 (35.0) | 47 (47.5) | ||||
Level of education | |||||||
Primary school | 219 | 24 (11.0) | 121 | 16 (13.2) | 98 | 8 (8.2) | 0.476 |
Secondary school | 121 (55.2) | 66 (54.6) | 55 (56.1) | ||||
University | 74 (33.8) | 39 (32.2) | 35 (35.7) | ||||
Professional activity | |||||||
In activity | 223 | 99 (44.4) | 125 | 54 (43.2) | 98 | 45 (45.9) | 0.685 |
No activity | 124 (55.6) | 71 (56.8) | 53 (54.1) | ||||
Financial situation | |||||||
Good | 229 | 68 (29.7) | 127 | 38 (29.9) | 102 | 30 (29.4) | 0.614 |
Satisfactory | 105 (45.8) | 61 (48.0) | 44 (43.1) | ||||
Bad | 56 (24.5) | 28 (22.1) | 28 (27.5) | ||||
Traumatic event impact scale (IES) | |||||||
Score < 26 | 190 | 136 (71.6) | 102 | 70 (68.6) | 88 | 66 (75.0) | 0.331 |
Score ≥ 26 | 54 (28.4) | 32 (31.4) | 22 (25.0) | ||||
Quality of life (EQ-5D) | |||||||
M (95%CI) | 210 | 85.8 (84.6–87.0) | 119 | 85.5 (83.6–87.3) | 91 | 86.3 (84.8–87.8) | 0.494 |
Cancer location | |||||||
Cervix and body of the uterus | 225 | 23 (10.2) | 123 | 11 (8.9) | 102 | 12 (11.8) | 0.740 |
Ovary | 88 (39.1) | 50 (40.7) | 38 (37.2) | ||||
Breast | 114 (50.7) | 62 (50.4) | 52 (51.0) | ||||
Chemotherapy protocol | |||||||
Mono-chemotherapy | 214 | 123 (57.5) | 112 | 67 (59.8) | 102 | 56 (54.9) | 0.467 |
Polychemotherapy | 91 (42.5) | 45 (40.2) | 46 (45.1) | ||||
Metastases | |||||||
No | 203 | 58 (28.6) | 105 | 30 (28.6) | 98 | 28 (28.6) | 1.000 |
Yes | 145 (71.4) | 75 (71.4) | 70 (71.4) | ||||
Self-reported time in the oncological outpatient unit (h) | |||||||
M (95%CI) | 217 | 4 h 48 min (4 h 34 min–5 h 02 min) | 121 | 5 h 10 min (4 h 44 min–5 h 22 min) | 96 | 4 h 29 min (4 h 07 min–4 h 52 min) | 0.021 |
Variables | Satisfaction with Physicians | p |
---|---|---|
Age | ||
27–47 years | 60.4 (21.0) | 0.088 |
48–68 years | 68.0 (19.7) | |
69–85 years | 70.4 (21.3) | |
Patient group | ||
Control (Before intervention) | 67.9 (20.7) | 0.621 |
Intervention (After intervention) | 66.5 (20.1) | |
Marital status | ||
Living with a partner | 66.3 (19.9) | 0.443 |
Single | 68.5 (20.9) | |
Level of education | ||
Primary school | 72.4 (19.0) | 0.418 |
Secondary school | 66.1 (21.1) | |
University | 66.6 (18.6) | |
Cancer location | ||
Cervix and body of the uterus | 70.9 (18.7) | 0.127 |
Ovary | 70.5 (20.8) | |
Breast | 64.8 (20.1) | |
Chemotherapy protocol | ||
Mono-chemotherapy | 65.2 (20.6) | 0.070 |
Polychemotherapy | 70.5 (19.9) | |
Consultation with an oncologist before chemotherapy sessions | ||
Useful | 68.32 (20.20) | 0.104 |
Not useful | 62.99 (20.84) | |
Out-of-hospital consultation with a physician since the start of chemotherapy | ||
Yes | 65.9 (19.8) | 0.094 |
No | 72.3 (23.3) | |
Quality of life (EQ-5D) | ||
Correlation score | 0.2 | 0.026 |
Traumatic event impact scale (IES) | ||
Score < 26 | 68.0 (19.6) | 0.344 |
Score ≥ 26 | 64.7 (22.3) | |
Self-reported time in the oncological outpatient unit (h) | ||
Correlation score | −0.03 | 0.668 |
Time spent in the oncological outpatient unit during the last chemotherapy session | ||
Shorter than expected | 82.4 (16.9) | 0.007 |
As expected | 64.6 (20.4) | |
Longer than expected | 65.8 (19.1) | |
Time spent in the oncological outpatient unit was adapted to the care received | ||
No | 60.4 (19.5) | 0.001 |
Yes | 70.2 (19.9) |
Satisfaction with Physicians | Coefficient | p |
---|---|---|
Age | ||
27–47 years | 1 | |
48–68 years | 8.2 | 0.062 |
69–85 years | 10.6 | 0.044 |
Patient group | ||
Control (Before intervention) | 1 | |
Intervention (After intervention) | −4.1 | 0.184 |
Self-reported time in the oncological outpatient unit (h) | −0.01 | 0.887 |
Quality of life (EQ-5D) | 0.4 | 0.025 |
Time spent in the oncological outpatient unit was adapted to the care received | ||
No | 1 | |
Yes | 8.9 | 0.008 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Marino, P.; Touzani, R.; Seguin, L.; Moulin, J.F.; Palomares, M.; Cappiello, M.-A.; Provansal, M.; Vittot, M.; Dermeche, S.; Launay, S.; et al. Advance Approval of Outpatient Chemotherapy via Phone Call Optimizes Healthcare Delivery without Compromising Patient Satisfaction with Care. Cancers 2021, 13, 1337. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13061337
Marino P, Touzani R, Seguin L, Moulin JF, Palomares M, Cappiello M-A, Provansal M, Vittot M, Dermeche S, Launay S, et al. Advance Approval of Outpatient Chemotherapy via Phone Call Optimizes Healthcare Delivery without Compromising Patient Satisfaction with Care. Cancers. 2021; 13(6):1337. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13061337
Chicago/Turabian StyleMarino, Patricia, Rajae Touzani, Lorène Seguin, Jean Francois Moulin, Myriam Palomares, Maria-Antonietta Cappiello, Magali Provansal, Martine Vittot, Slimane Dermeche, Simon Launay, and et al. 2021. "Advance Approval of Outpatient Chemotherapy via Phone Call Optimizes Healthcare Delivery without Compromising Patient Satisfaction with Care" Cancers 13, no. 6: 1337. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13061337