Quality of care in the oncology outpatient setting from patients' perspective: a systematic review of questionnaires' content and psychometric performance.

BACKGROUND: Cancer care is increasingly provided in the outpatient setting, requiring specific monitoring of care quality. The patients' perspective is an important indicator of care quality and needs to be assessed with well designed, psychometrically sound questionnaires. We performed a systematic literature review of currently available patient satisfaction measures for use in cancer outpatient care settings. METHODS: We carried out MEDLINE/PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus searches of papers published over the past 15 years that describe cancer patient satisfaction questionnaires for use in the outpatient setting. We used the adapted COSMIN checklist to assess the quality of the questionnaires' measurement properties. RESULTS: A total of 6677 citations were identified and 76 relevant articles were read, of which 55 were found either not to be relevant or to provide insufficient psychometric information. The remaining 21 studies pertained to 14 patient satisfaction questionnaires. Continuity and transition, accessibility, and involvement of family/friends were less frequently addressed despite their relevance in outpatient oncology. Almost half of the psychometric studies did not provide information on item level missing data. Most internal consistency estimates (Cronbach's α) were satisfactory. Few studies reported test-retest assessment (n = 5), used confirmatory factor analysis (n = 2), or assessed fit to a graded response item response theory model (n = 3). Only three questionnaires were cross-culturally validated. CONCLUSION: Important aspects of care may be missed by current patient satisfaction questionnaires for use in the cancer outpatient setting. Additional evidence is needed of their psychometric performance, especially for cross-cultural comparative assessments.

Short-term psychological impact of the BRCA1/2 test result in women with breast cancer according to their perceived probability of genetic predisposition to cancer.

BACKGROUND: The effect of BRCA1/2 gene test result on anxiety, depression, cancer-related thought intrusion or avoidance and perceived control over cancer risk was assessed in breast cancer (BC) patients, according to their perceived probability of genetic predisposition to cancer. METHODS: Two hundred and forty-three (89% response rate) women with BC completed questionnaires after an initial genetic counselling visit (T1), of which 180 (66%) completed questionnaires again after receiving the BRCA1/2 results (T2). The discrepancy between women's perceived probability of cancer genetic predisposition at T1 and the geneticist's computed estimates was assessed. RESULTS: In all, 74% of women received a negative uninformative (NU), 11% a positive BRCA1/2 and 15% an unclassified variant (UV) result. On hierarchical regression analysis, in women with a positive BRCA1/2 result (vs NU or UV), a lower perceived probability of cancer genetic predisposition than objective estimates at T1 predicted lower levels of anxiety at T2 (ß=-0.28; P<0.01), whereas in women receiving a UV result (vs NU or positive BRCA1/2), a lower perceived probability of cancer genetic predisposition than objective estimates at T1 predicted higher levels of anxiety (ß=0.20; P<0.01), depression (ß=0.19; P<0.05) and intrusion (ß=0.18; P<0.05) at T2. CONCLUSION: The type of BRCA1/2 test result differently affects distress according to women's perceived probability of genetic predisposition before testing.

Assessment of needs, health-related quality of life, and satisfaction with care in breast cancer patients to better target supportive care.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed whether breast cancer (BC) patients express similar levels of needs for equivalent severity of symptoms, functioning difficulties, or degrees of satisfaction with care aspects. BC patients who did (or not) report needs in spite of similar difficulties were identified among their sociodemographic or clinical characteristics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred and eighty-four (73% response rate) BC patients recruited in ambulatory or surgery hospital services completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ)-C30 quality of life [health-related quality of life (HRQOL)], the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 (in-patient) or OUT-PATSAT35 (out-patient) satisfaction with care, and the supportive care needs survey short form 34-item (SCNS-SF34) measures. RESULTS: HRQOL or satisfaction with care scale scores explained 41%, 45%, 40% and 22% of variance in, respectively, psychological, physical/daily living needs, information/health system, and care/support needs (P < 0.001). BC patients' education level, having children, hospital service attendance, and anxiety/depression levels significantly predicted differences in psychological needs relative to corresponding difficulties (adjusted R² = 0.11). Medical history and anxiety/depression levels significantly predicted differences in information/health system needs relative to degrees of satisfaction with doctors, nurses, or radiotherapy technicians and general satisfaction (adjusted R² = 0.12). Unmet needs were most prevalent in the psychological domains across hospital services. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of needs, HRQOL, and satisfaction with care highlights the subgroups of BC patients requiring better supportive care targeting.

Validation of the 34-item Supportive Care Needs Survey and 8-item breast module French versions (SCNS-SF34-Fr and SCNS-BR8-Fr) in breast cancer patients.

This study aimed to assess the psychometric robustness of the French version of the Supportive Care Needs Survey and breast cancer (BC) module (SCNS-SF34-Fr and SCNS-BR8-Fr). Breast cancer patients were recruited in two hospitals (in Paris, France and Lausanne, Switzerland) either in ambulatory chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or surgery services. They were invited to complete the SCNS-SF34-Fr and SCNS-BR8-Fr as well as quality of life and patient satisfaction questionnaires. Three hundred and eighty-four (73% response rate) BC patients returned completed questionnaires. A five-factor model was confirmed for the SCNS-SF34-Fr with adequate goodness-of-fit indexes, although some items evidenced content redundancy, and a one-factor was identified for the SCNS-BR8-Fr. Internal consistency and test-retest estimates were satisfactory for most scales. The SCNS-SF34-Fr and SCNS-BR8-Fr scales demonstrated conceptual differences with the quality of life and satisfaction with care scales, highlighting the specific relevance of this assessment. Different levels of needs could be differentiated between groups of BC patients in terms of age and level of education (P < 0.001). The SCNS-SF34-Fr and SCNS-BR8-Fr present adequate psychometric properties despite some redundant items. These questionnaires allow for the crucial endeavour to design appropriate care services according to BC patients' characteristics.