Standardizing chemotherapy education for quality improvement.

Authors

Carole Tremonti

Carole Kathleen Dalby

Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA

Carole Kathleen Dalby, Marylou Nesbitt, Kathleen Kennerley, Lisa Lacoursiere, Carol Frechette, Stephen Flaherty, Paul J. Catalano, Frances Fuller, Jodi Thiele, Heather Gilchrist, Judith Kostka, Lori A. Buswell

Organizations

Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center at Milford Regional Medical Center, Milford, MA

Research Funding

No funding sources reported

Background: Variation of chemotherapy teaching at three affiliated regional oncology centers was associated with a low patient satisfaction PS; Press Ganey Survey for Adult Oncology score of 83.7% in understanding what to expect during chemotherapy treatment and 72.9% in how to manage chemotherapy side effects. Nursing staff collaborated to standardize content to improve PS and quality of care. Methods: Chemotherapy teaching tools varied across practice locations. From September-January 2012, three plan-do-study-act cycles were implemented. 1) A standardized teaching checklist, 2) electronic patient calendars, 3) 3 weeks later a patient education assessment survey (EAS). The teaching checklist detailed: 1) relevant chemotherapy information; 2) calendars listing (clinic appointments, symptoms requiring MD/NP notification, how to contact providers); and 3) ES assessed patient’s level of comprehension. Results: We used logistic regression for each PS score, estimating the time-trend of scores for each period and compared the time trend slopes pre versus post using a two-sided test for interaction. For each item, the Table displays the slope estimate (log odds-ratio per month) for each relevant intervention period, the associated 95% confidence intervals and the interaction test p-value. Negative slope indicates decreasing score trend with time while positive slope indicates increasing trend. The interaction test for each PS measure showed statistically significantly different slopes when comparing pre versus post periods for each PS item. Post intervention, scores for what to expect during chemotherapy rose 83.7% to 92.1%. Explanation of how to manage chemotherapy side effects rose 72.9% to 91.9%. Staff reported high satisfaction, highlighting its benefit to patients. Conclusions: Standardizing chemotherapy teaching improves PS as evidenced by statistically significant improvement in scores. Future endeavors will involve sharing chemotherapy teaching tools throughout the institution to improve PS scores for chemotherapy education.

Item Pre
Post
P value
Slope 95% CI Slope 95% CI
How to manage chemotherapy side effects -0.06 (-0.20, 0.07) 0.46 (0.04, 0.89) 0.021
What to expect during chemotherapy -0.12 (-0.26,0.01) 0.52 (0.08,0.96) 0.006

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2013 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

General Poster Session B: Practice of Quality and Health Reform

Track

Practice of Quality,Health Reform: Implications for Costs and Quality

Sub Track

Involving Patients in Quality Care

Citation

J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl 31; abstr 136)

Abstract #

136

Poster Bd #

A2

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts