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: 7.04). 03/2011; 22(3):723-9. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdq417
Source: PubMed


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


Available from: Rebecca Anne Miksad,
  • Source
    • "These measures should go beyond the traditional measures of quality of life (de Haes et al, 2000) and should include patient satisfaction (http://www.nhssurveys.org) (Jean-Pierre et al, 2011; Kamo et al, 2011) and patients' perceptions of the extent to which they felt that they were involved in the decision-making process (Elwyn et al, 2005; Kriston et al, 2010). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTs), also known as tumour boards or multidisciplinary case conferences, are an integral component of contemporary cancer care. There are logistical problems with setting up and maintaining participation in these meetings. An ill-defined concept, the virtual MDT (vMDT), has arisen in response to these difficulties. We have, in order to provide clarity and to generate discussion, attempted to define the concept of the vMDT, outline its advantages and disadvantages, and consider some of the practical aspects involved in setting up a virtual MDT. Methods: This is an unstructured review of published evidence and personal experience relating to virtual teams in general, and to MDTs in particular. Results: We have devised a simple taxonomy for MDTs, discussed some of the practicalities involved in setting up a vMDT, and described some of the potential advantages and disadvantages associated with vMDTs. Conclusion: The vMDT may be useful for discussions concerning rare or unusual tumours, or for helping guide the assessment and management of patients with uncommon complications related to treatment. However, the vMDT is a niche concept and is currently unlikely to replace the more traditional face-to-face MDT in the management of common tumours at specific sites.
    British Journal of Cancer 06/2013; 108(12). DOI:10.1038/bjc.2013.231 · 4.84 Impact Factor
  • 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 · 2.91 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.
    BJU International 09/2012; 111(3b). DOI:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11439.x · 3.53 Impact Factor
Show more