3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      La experiencia del paciente en el cáncer de pulmón y de mama a través del recorrido del paciente Translated title: Patient-reported experience in lung and breast cancer through a patient journey

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Resumen Objetivo: Analizar la experiencia aportada por los pacientes con cáncer de mama y pulmón utilizando la metodología del recorrido del paciente en un hospital español. Método: Se empleó un diseño mixto, con entrevistas a 16 profesionales sanitarios y 25 pacientes (método cualitativo), y un cuestionario basado en el indicador Net Promoter Score a 127 pacientes (método cuantitativo). Criterios de inclusión: pacientes oncológicos > 18 años tratados en el hospital entre febrero y mayo de 2019. Criterios de exclusión: pacientes pediátricos, en cuidados paliativos o que estaban hospitalizados en el momento del estudio. Resultados: Se identificaron seis fases a partir de los datos obtenidos en el método cualitativo: mi vida antes del diagnóstico, descubrir, comenzar, tratamiento, seguimiento y mi vida hoy. En la fase mi vida antes del diagnóstico se estableció un nivel de experiencia funcional, ya que la vida cumplía las expectativas de los pacientes. En la fase de descubrir se observó que las expectativas de los pacientes se cumplían, aunque se encontraron varias experiencias satélite. En la fase comenzar, la experiencia tendió a ser negativa debido a los largos tiempos de espera y al estrés emocional y físico. La fase de tratamiento se consideró como una experiencia de nivel básico-deficiente, debido a los tiempos de espera y a la falta de apoyo institucional. La experiencia en la fase de seguimiento fue positiva respecto a las pruebas y las visitas, pero se observaron puntos críticos en los tiempos de espera. En la fase mi vida hoy se mencionó el esfuerzo realizado por los profesionales sanitarios para garantizar el mejor tratamiento y atención posibles. En cuanto al análisis cuantitativo, se obtuvo una puntuación positiva (46%) para el indicador Net Promoter Score, ya que el 60% de los pacientes pertenecían a la categoría de promotores, es decir, estaban satisfechos con el servicio ofrecido por el hospital. Conclusiones: Este estudio permite conocer la experiencia de los pacientes oncológicos en las seis etapas principales de la enfermedad. Las fases más positivas fueron “mi vida antes del diagnóstico” y “seguimiento”, mientras que las fases con tendencia negativa fueron “inicio” y “tratamiento” debido a los tiempos de espera y la carga emocional que suponen para el paciente.

          Translated abstract

          Abstract Objective: To analyse a patient journey based on the experience reported by breast and lung cancer patients at Spanish hospital. Method: A mixed design was used, with interviews with 16 health professionals and 25 patients (qualitative method) and a Net Promoter Score questionnaire to 127 patients (quantitative method). Inclusion criteria: oncology patients > 18 years treated in hospital between February- May 2019. Exclusion criteria: paediatric patients, in palliative care or who were hospitalised at the time of the study. Results: Six phases were identified from the data obtained in the qualitative method: my life before diagnosis; discovery; initiation; treatment; follow- up; and my current life. In the my life before diagnosis phase, a functional level of experience was established, as patients’ lives met their expectations. In the discovery phase, patients’ expectations were observed to be met, although several satellite experiences were found. In the initiation phase, the experience tended to be negative due to long waiting times and emotional and physical stress. The treatment phase was defined as a basic-poor experience, due to waiting times and lack of institutional support. The experience in the follow-up phase was positive in terms of tests and visits, but critical points were observed in waiting times. In the current phase, the effort made by health professionals to ensure the best possible treatment and care was mentioned. In terms of quantitative analysis, a positive score (46%) was obtained for the Net Promoter Score indicator, as 60% of patients were promoters, i.e., they were satisfied with the service offered by the hospital. Conclusions: This study provides insight into the experience of cancer patients in the six main stages of the disease. The most positive phases were “my life before diagnosis” and “follow-up” while the phases with a negative trend were “initiation” and “treatment” due to the waiting times and the emotional burden on the patient.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries

          This article provides a status report on the global burden of cancer worldwide using the GLOBOCAN 2018 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, with a focus on geographic variability across 20 world regions. There will be an estimated 18.1 million new cancer cases (17.0 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 9.6 million cancer deaths (9.5 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) in 2018. In both sexes combined, lung cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer (11.6% of the total cases) and the leading cause of cancer death (18.4% of the total cancer deaths), closely followed by female breast cancer (11.6%), prostate cancer (7.1%), and colorectal cancer (6.1%) for incidence and colorectal cancer (9.2%), stomach cancer (8.2%), and liver cancer (8.2%) for mortality. Lung cancer is the most frequent cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among males, followed by prostate and colorectal cancer (for incidence) and liver and stomach cancer (for mortality). Among females, breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death, followed by colorectal and lung cancer (for incidence), and vice versa (for mortality); cervical cancer ranks fourth for both incidence and mortality. The most frequently diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death, however, substantially vary across countries and within each country depending on the degree of economic development and associated social and life style factors. It is noteworthy that high-quality cancer registry data, the basis for planning and implementing evidence-based cancer control programs, are not available in most low- and middle-income countries. The Global Initiative for Cancer Registry Development is an international partnership that supports better estimation, as well as the collection and use of local data, to prioritize and evaluate national cancer control efforts. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2018;0:1-31. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            A systematic review of evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness

            Objective To explore evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness outcomes. Design Systematic review. Setting A wide range of settings within primary and secondary care including hospitals and primary care centres. Participants A wide range of demographic groups and age groups. Primary and secondary outcome measures A broad range of patient safety and clinical effectiveness outcomes including mortality, physical symptoms, length of stay and adherence to treatment. Results This study, summarising evidence from 55 studies, indicates consistent positive associations between patient experience, patient safety and clinical effectiveness for a wide range of disease areas, settings, outcome measures and study designs. It demonstrates positive associations between patient experience and self-rated and objectively measured health outcomes; adherence to recommended clinical practice and medication; preventive care (such as health-promoting behaviour, use of screening services and immunisation); and resource use (such as hospitalisation, length of stay and primary-care visits). There is some evidence of positive associations between patient experience and measures of the technical quality of care and adverse events. Overall, it was more common to find positive associations between patient experience and patient safety and clinical effectiveness than no associations. Conclusions The data presented display that patient experience is positively associated with clinical effectiveness and patient safety, and support the case for the inclusion of patient experience as one of the central pillars of quality in healthcare. It supports the argument that the three dimensions of quality should be looked at as a group and not in isolation. Clinicians should resist sidelining patient experience as too subjective or mood-oriented, divorced from the ‘real’ clinical work of measuring safety and effectiveness.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              What is the value of the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures toward improvement of patient outcomes, processes of care, and health service outcomes in cancer care? A systematic review of controlled trials.

              The systematic use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has been advocated as an effective way to standardize cancer practice. Yet, the question of whether PROMs can lead to actual improvements in the quality of patient care remains under debate. This review examined whether inclusion of PROM in routine clinical practice is associated with improvements in patient outcomes, processes of care, and health service outcomes during active anticancer treatment.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                fh
                Farmacia Hospitalaria
                Farm Hosp.
                Grupo Aula Médica (Toledo, Toledo, Spain )
                1130-6343
                2171-8695
                August 2022
                : 46
                : 4
                : 215-223
                Affiliations
                [3] Madrid orgnamePfizer España
                [2] Madrid orgnamePharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia España
                [1] Toledo orgnameComplejo Hospitalario de Toledo orgdiv1Departamento de Farmacia España
                [4] Toledo orgnameComplejo Hospitalario de Toledo orgdiv1Departamento de Oncología Médica España
                Article
                S1130-63432022000400003 S1130-6343(22)04600400003
                10.7399/fh.13191
                3ae31bc5-f7e1-4b46-8347-caf51bcbecc0

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 23 December 2021
                : 02 March 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 29, Pages: 9
                Product

                SciELO Spain

                Categories
                Originales

                Patient-centered care,Journey patient,Patient reported experience,Spain,Servicio de oncología,Atención centrada en el paciente,Recorrido del paciente,Experiencia reportada por el paciente,España,Oncology service

                Comments

                Comment on this article