Impact of a see-and-treat melanoma clinic on patient experience

BACKGROUND

See-and-treat ('one stop') clinics for cutaneous and noncutaneous tumor streams have been shown to enhance patient experience, amongst other benefits, such as reduced waiting time to surgery if required. To date, there have been no studies assessing patient perception of one-stop clinics dedicated to the diagnosis and treatment of melanomas and pigmented lesions.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a prospective survey study examining patient's perception of a see-and-treat pigmented lesion clinic.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Consenting patients were contacted by phone to complete a survey comprising 10 statements relating to different facets of the clinic, four weeks after their initial assessment. Reponses were documented on a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

A total of 107/142 (75.4%) patients consented to partake in the study. Compared to overall mean response, patients who underwent same-day biopsy reported higher satisfaction (4.9 vs. 4.5, p < .01) and perceived convenience (4.8 vs. 4.4, p < .01). Of those who received same-day procedures, no patient reported being given insufficient time to consider surgical treatment.

CONCLUSION

A see-and-treat model for pigmented lesions, incorporating same-day excisional biopsy for lesions suspicious for melanoma, is viewed upon favorably by patients.

Differences in cutaneous melanoma treatment and patient satisfaction

Although clinical guidelines exist, the management of patients with cutaneous melanoma (CM) is a complex process that may vary between different care providers with potential dysfunctions ultimately mirrored in the overall patient satisfaction. The aim of the present study was to investigate the CM management as related to lead times, surgical quality and diagnosis communication with the hypothesis that the care may differ between providers and disparities may impact patient satisfaction. Medical records of 181 patients were retrospectively analyzed with parallel patient satisfaction evaluation by telephone interviews. Overall mean lead times from initial diagnosis until completion of all surgery and histopathology reports were 80-100 days and delays occurred at every step of the process. General practitioners performed excision biopsies faster however this was mitigated by slower histopathology processing. University level CM care showed less lag time between excision biopsy, wide local excision for thick melanomas and histopathology confirmation. University level care operated with twice the surgical margin as compared to general practitioners and non-university level specialists. Male patients had larger excision biopsy margins and significantly shorter lead times than female patients. Patient satisfaction rates were generally higher in the academic hospitals as compared to general practitioners and non-university dermatology clinics. Surprisingly, there was no correlation between lead times and patient satisfaction. Taken together, CM show substantial variation and caution should be practiced when using patient satisfaction as a quality indicator.

Determinants of patient satisfaction with cancer care delivered by the Danish healthcare system

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported quality of care, which is often measured by patients' overall rating of care, is gaining more attention within the field of oncology. The aim of this study was to examine factors that determine adult cancer patients' overall rating of prediagnosis care (PDC) and care provided during treatment (CDT).

METHODS

Data were collected from 2 recurrent nationwide surveys among adult cancer patients in Denmark in 2010 and 2012. Analyses regarding PDC were based on the 2010 study population (n = 3681), and CDT analyses were based on the 2012 follow-up population (n = 2315). Multivariable logistic regression models were applied.

RESULTS

Overall, 55.1% of patients reported excellent PDC and 61.9% reported excellent CDT. The odds of rating PDC and CDT as excellent differed significantly according to sex, age, and cancer diagnosis. Furthermore, the extent of supportive relatives, comorbidity, self-reported health, and region of treatment significantly determined ratings of CDT. Patients who reported negative experiences related to waiting time, information, coordination, and continuity of care during PDC and CDT, respectively, were significantly less likely overall to rate their care as excellent. The final regression models for PDC and CDT explained 38.2% and 30.6%, respectively, of the variance in the overall rating.

CONCLUSION

Learning how patient characteristics influence the overall rating of care can enable health care providers to accommodate vulnerable patient groups. Identification of health care aspects that are independently associated with the overall rating of care may enable targeted efforts when planning and prioritizing initiatives aimed at improving the patient-experienced quality of care. Cancer 2017;123:2918-26. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Skin cancer education for primary care physicians: a systematic review of published evaluated interventions

BACKGROUND

Early detection of melanoma may provide an opportunity to positively impact melanoma mortality. Numerous skin cancer educational interventions have been developed for primary care physicians (PCPs) to improve diagnostic accuracy. Standardized training is also a prerequisite for formal testing of melanoma screening in the primary care setting.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review to determine the extent of evaluated interventions designed to educate PCPs about skin cancer, including melanoma.

DESIGN

Relevant studies in the English language were identified through systemic searches performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and Cochrane through December 2010. Supplementary information was obtained from corresponding authors of the included studies when necessary.

APPROACH

Studies eligible for inclusion formally evaluated skin cancer education interventions and were designed primarily for PCPs. Excluded studies lacked a specified training intervention, used decision-making software, focused solely on risk factor identification, or did not directly educate or assess participants. Twenty studies met the selection criteria. Data were extracted according to intervention content and delivery format, and study outcomes.

KEY RESULTS

All interventions included instructions about skin cancer diagnosis, but otherwise varied in content. Curricula utilized six distinct educational techniques, usually incorporating more than one. Intervention duration varied from 12 min to over 6 h. Eight of the 20 studies were randomized trials. Most studies (18/20, 90%) found a significant improvement in at least one of the following five outcome categories: knowledge, competence, confidence, diagnostic performance, or systems outcomes. Competence was most commonly measured; no study evaluated all categories. Variability in study design, interventions, and outcome measures prevented correlation of outcomes with intervention characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the development of many isolated educational interventions, few have been tested rigorously or evaluated under sufficient standardized conditions to allow for quantitative comparison. Improved and rigorously tested skin cancer educational interventions for PCPs with outcome measures focusing on changes in performance are needed.

Common, important, and unmet needs of cancer outpatients

PURPOSE

To maximize patient well-being, health and social care should, whenever possible, address individual patient needs. The present study aims firstly, to identify prevalent, salient and unmet needs amongst cancer outpatients, and secondly, to explore socio-demographic and clinical influences on expressed need.

METHODS

One-hundred and ten outpatients registered at a UK cancer treatment centre completed a self-report questionnaire measuring the presence, salience and degree to which 80 need items were met. Six broad cancer sites were represented: urology, colorectal, breast, gynaecology, haematology, and head and neck.

RESULTS

The mean number of needs reported was 27. The top five needs concerned the treatment, care and health information patients receive from healthcare professionals, all of which were rated as well met. Least met needs included receiving genetic information, information about lifestyle changes, help with worries about spread or recurrence, and parking near treatment centres. Salient needs showed greater variation across the sample and were often unmet, for example the need for genetic information, and the need for information about symptoms/indicators of recurrence. Gender (female), age (younger), having an informal caregiver, and cancer site all affected aspects of need; whereas time since diagnosis and type of treatment did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Acknowledging these influences on patient need could help guide patient-centred support services with potential gains to patient satisfaction and well-being.