Article

Evaluation of the SCA instrument for measuring patient satisfaction with cancer care administered via paper or via the Internet

Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Annals of Oncology (Impact Factor: 6.58). 03/2011; 22(3):723-9. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdq417
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Patients' perspectives provide valuable information on quality of care. This study evaluates the feasibility and validity of Internet administration of Service Satisfaction Scale for Cancer Care (SCA) to assess patient satisfaction with outcome, practitioner manner/skill, information, and waiting/access.
Primary data collected from November 2007 to April 2008. Patients receiving cancer care within 1 year were recruited from oncology, surgery, and radiation clinics at a tertiary care hospital. An Internet-based version of the 16-item SCA was developed. Participants were randomised to Internet SCA followed by paper SCA 2 weeks later or vice versa. Seven-point Likert scale responses were converted to a 0-100 scale (minimum-maximum satisfaction). Response distribution, Cronbach's alpha, and test-retest correlations were calculated.
Among 122 consenting participants, 78 responded to initial SCA. Mean satisfaction scores for paper/Internet were 91/90 (outcome), 95/94 (practitioner manner/skill), 89/90 (information), and 86/86 (waiting/access). Response rate and item missingness were similar for Internet and paper. Except for practitioner manner/skill, test-retest correlations were robust r = 0.77 (outcome), 0.74 (information), and 0.75 (waiting/access) (all P < 0.001).
Internet SCA administration is a feasible and a valid measurement of cancer care satisfaction for a wide range of cancer diagnoses, treatment modalities, and clinic settings.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Rebecca Anne Miksad, Aug 11, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
65 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Assessing patient satisfaction might help to detect so far unknown patient needs and could contribute to quality assurance within the health care system. We evaluated patient satisfaction and its correlates in a consecutive sample of patients undergoing external beam radiation therapy. Patient satisfaction was evaluated within a prospective study with two validated instruments (FPZ, ZUF-8) during the first week of radiation therapy in two university-based radiation oncology departments. A total of 273 patients could be analyzed. Most patients were irradiated for breast or urogenital cancer. Overall patient satisfaction was high (94.9-98.8%). The most important items for patient satisfaction included the following: "skills of physicians" followed by "physician contact with patients," "care," and "information" (Tab. 2). Neither center nor disease entity correlated with global patient satisfaction. Of the patients, 46% reported that they would have preferred additional information prior to the onset of radiotherapy. Patients who sought additional information reported a lower global patient satisfaction (p < 0.001). In multiple linear regression analysis, the need for more information, male gender, and a higher level of education were significant predictors for lower global patient satisfaction (Tab. 6). During the first week of radiation therapy, patients rate patient-physician interaction and communication on treatment and disease as important factors for their satisfaction. Supplying additional information to subsets of patients prior to starting radiotherapy might help to further improve satisfaction.
    Strahlentherapie und Onkologie 02/2012; 188(6):492-8. DOI:10.1007/s00066-011-0056-1 · 2.73 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Study Type - Therapy (attitude prevalence) Level of Evidence 2a What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Marked differences in uncertainty among patients have been found relating to race and social environment indicating that as uncertainty increases, social functioning declines. Correlations have been found between uncertainty and patients' coping, psychological adjustment and perceptions of their health and illness. Studies suggest the detrimental effect of uncertainty among patients with prostate cancer in the perception of their quality of life. These studies underline the potential benefit of targeted intervention. The study provides a unique insight into the impact of uncertainty and perception of danger on overall satisfaction with treatment outcomes in men with prostate cancer. Its results suggest that possible disparities related to patient racial background and education may exist in the perception of cancer-related uncertainty. Racial and educational disparities, coupled with a mild to moderate association of uncertainty or danger perception and overall outcome satisfaction, suggest an unmet need for healthcare and nursing services for men undergoing treatment for prostate cancer. OBJECTIVES: •  To investigate patient uncertainty and perception of danger regarding prospects for clinical prostate cancer control. •  To determine the impact of these factors on satisfaction with overall prostate cancer treatment outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: •  Men who had undergone primary treatment for early stage prostate cancer and who were participants in the Prostate Cancer Outcomes and Satisfaction with Treatment Quality Assessment (PROSTQA) prospective cohort study of prostate cancer outcomes (the parent study) were offered the opportunity to participate in the present study. •  Centralized phone interviews were conducted to determine patient-reported uncertainty regarding cancer status (measured by the Mishel Uncertainty in Illness Scale-Community Form), perception of danger (measured by Folkman and Lazarus' Appraisal Scale) and satisfaction with treatment outcome (measured by the Service Satisfaction Scale for Cancer Care). The study used the same centralized telephone interview centre as was used in the parent study. •  Data were collected at 48, 60 or 72 months after the completion of prostate cancer treatment. •  Relationships among measures were characterized by Spearman rank correlation coefficients (r). RESULTS: •  A total of 338 agreed to participate, representing 76% of those who were invited. •  Younger patients experienced less uncertainty (r= 0.20, P < 0.001), yet reported greater perception of danger (r=-0.12; P= 0.03) concerning their previously treated prostate cancer. •  African-American patients showed greater uncertainty than other ethnic groups (P= 0.005) but did not have a greater perception of danger (P= 0.36). •  Education played a major role in uncertainty; patients with lower levels of education tended to report higher degrees of uncertainty (r=-0.25; P < 0.001). •  There was a mild to moderate general association between the three outcomes. A greater sense of uncertainty was associated with a greater perception of danger (r= 0.34, P < 0.001), and as danger and uncertainty increased, satisfaction with treatment outcome tended to decrease (r was between -0.30 and -0.34, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: •  Results suggest that possible disparities related to patient racial background and education may exist in the perception of cancer-related uncertainty. •  Racial and educational disparities, coupled with a mild to moderate association of uncertainty or danger perception and overall outcome satisfaction, suggest an unmet need for healthcare and nursing services for men undergoing treatment for prostate cancer.
    BJU International 09/2012; DOI:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11439.x · 3.13 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Previously we reported the development of a novel, inexpensive, online method to collect health-related quality of life (HRQoL) information to facilitate responses among patients and reduce loss to follow-up. We aimed to validate the practice by comparing responses to a representative validated instrument [the Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM)] administered both online and in the traditional paper form. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consented patients were administered validated HRQoL instruments, including the SHIM, both in-office and via email. Responses to the SHIM were compared between administration formats. Paired-sample testing analyzed test-retest reliability, while concordance was assessed by intraclass analysis and a Bland-Altman plot; Cronbach's alpha examined internal reliability. Criterion validity was measured using both SHIM-defined erectile function categories and a dichotomized potency definition (SHIM≥17). RESULTS: 508 men consented to participate. Of these, 359/508 (71%) patients completed the SHIM in-person, 277/508 (55%) completed the online form (p<0.001), and 116/508 (23%) contemporaneously completed both instruments. Comparison of scores revealed little variation and strong correlation (r(2)=0.83, p<0.001). Intraclass and Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated strong agreement across mediums. Cronbach's alpha was excellent (0.97) for the online tool. Erectile function classification was identical in 73% of patients, with only 7% of patients differing by more than one class. Dichotomized potency was consistently defined in 94% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The online administered SHIM maintains its validity and provides consistent responses. Online administration can capture patients who do not complete the paper questionnaires and may serve as a reliable adjunct to paper administration for validated outcomes research.
    The Journal of urology 10/2012; DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2012.10.053 · 3.75 Impact Factor
Show more