br Results br This analysis included respondents with a
This analysis included 637 respondents with a diagnosis of breast (n = 304), prostate (n = 175), or lung (n = 158) cancer. Patient ages ranged from 65 to 97 years, 78% of patients were white, 65% were in the survivorship phase of care, and 45% had two or more comorbid con-ditions (Table 1). PCS scores ranged from 12.6 to 64.5 and were, on av-erage, almost a standard deviation below the general U.S. adult population; MCS scores (range = 19.6–72.0) were, on average, similar to the general U.S. adult population. Compared to the breast and pros-tate cancer groups, the lung cancer group had higher proportion of
Sample demographics overall and by cancer type.
Notes: NCI, National Cancer Institute.
white patients, less education, more comorbidities, and slightly lower PCS and MCS scores (Table 1).
The percentages of respondents who indicated high level of satisfac-tion with care (i.e., responded “strongly agree”) for each satisfaction item are shown in Table 2. The question “I feel that CY7-SE I am treated with courtesy and respect” had the highest percentage of patients who were highly satisfied (64%). Conversely, “I know what the next steps in my care are” had the lowest percentage of respondents who were highly satisfied (46%). Table 3 shows patient response profiles within each satisfaction domain with respect to the number of items indicating high level of satisfaction with care. In general, respondents reported the highest satisfaction in the Quality of Care domain with 42% of patients
Percent of “strongly agree” responses within each satisfaction domain (N = 637).
Domain Questions included within domain %
Access to Care I feel I have enough time with my doctor. 49.9
Making appointments is easy. 51.4
I know who to contact when I have a question. 50.4
Health problems related to the cancer and its 53.2
treatment are handled quickly.
Coordination of Care My regular doctor is informed about the results 50.3
of the test I get.
The doctors seem to communicate well about my 56.5
Patient-Provider I feel my health concerns are understood. 54.4 Communication I feel encouraged to talk about my personal 48.3
My treatment was explained in a way I could 54.1
Quality of Care I feel that I am treated with courtesy and respect. 63.5
I am satisfied with the care I received. 58.2
I receive high quality care from my specialists. 58.1
Nurses were thoughtful, courteous, and 61.0
Doctors, nurses, and medical staff did everything 57.8
they could to treat the health problems related to
the cancer and its treatment.
Patient Engagement I feel included in decisions about my health. 59.1
I feel confident in how I deal with the health care 46.5
I am able to get the advice I needed about my 47.8
I know what the next steps in my care are. 46.0
responding “strongly agree” to all 5 questions; and the lowest satisfac-tion in the Access to Care and Patient Engagement domains, with 32% of patients responding “strongly agree” to all domain questions.
3.1. Relationship Between HRQoL and Patient Satisfaction
Table 4 shows unadjusted and covariate-adjusted predicted satisfac-tion domain scores at different PCS and MCS score levels. At the sample
Patient response profiles within each satisfaction domain with respect to the number of questions with responses of “strongly agree”, and average satisfaction scores, overall and by cancer types.
Number of questions with responses of Domain Score
Row Row Row Row Row Row Mean (SD)
Access to Care
mean PCS of 42, the Quality of Care domain had the highest unadjusted and adjusted satisfaction scores (0.60 and 0.66, respectively) compared to other domain satisfaction scores; the Patient Engagement domain had the lowest unadjusted satisfaction score (0.49) and Coordination of Care domain had the lowest adjusted satisfaction score (0.46). A sim-ilar trend was observed at the sample mean MCS of 53 (Table 4). In all satisfaction domains, increases in PCS and MCS scores were associated with increases in domain satisfaction scores, however, the magnitudes of these positive associations were small both in unadjusted and adjusted estimates. After covariate adjustment, a standard deviation increase in PCS scores was associated with increases in domain satisfac-tion scores ranging from 0.02 to 0.04, corresponding to odds ratios rang-ing from 1.11 to 1.24 (Supplemental Table 1) and r effect sizes from 0.06 to 0.12, which are considered trivial to small. A standard deviation increase in MCS was associated with increases in domain scores ranging from 0.03 to 0.05, corresponding to odds ratios ranging from 1.10 to 1.22 (Supplemental Table 2) and r effect sizes from 0.05 to 0.11, also considered of trivial to small magnitude. Among the covariates included in the models, based on the magnitude of the estimated odds ratios, race and education were the stronger correlates of satisfaction across domains.