Cited by 86Patient Satisfaction in HealthcareCancer survivorship and careCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty

Distribution and determinants of patient satisfaction in oncology with a focus on health related quality of life

Open access
Lis, Christopher G, Rodeghier, Mark, Grutsch, James F, Gupta, Digant·2009·BMC Health Services Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients usually undergo extensive and debilitating treatments, which make quality of life (QoL) and patient satisfaction important health care assessment measures. However, very few studies have evaluated the relationship between QoL and patient satisfaction in oncology. We investigated the clinical, demographic and QoL factors associated with patient satisfaction in a large heterogeneous sample of cancer patients. METHODS: A cohort of 538 cancer patients treated at Cancer Treatment Centers of America (CTCA) was assessed. A patient satisfaction questionnaire developed in-house by CTCA was used. It covered the following dimensions of patient satisfaction: hospital operations and services, physicians and staff, and patient endorsements for themselves and others. QoL was assessed using the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30). The clinical, demographic and QoL factors were evaluated for predictive significance using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: The mean age of our patient population was 54.1 years (SD = 10.5, range 17-86), with a slight preponderance of females (57.2%). Breast cancer (n = 124) and lung cancer (n = 101) were the most frequent cancer types. 481 (89.4%) patients were "very satisfied" with their overall experience. Age and several QoL function and symptom scales were predictive of overall patient satisfaction upon univariate analysis. In the multivariate modeling, only those with a score above the median on the fatigue measure (i.e. worse fatigue) had reduced odds of 0.28 of being very satisfied (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Patient fatigue, as reported by the QoL fatigue scale, was an independent significant predictor of overall patient satisfaction. This finding argues for special attention and programs for cancer patients who report higher levels of fatigue given that fatigue is the most frequently reported symptom in cancer patients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1472-6963-9-190

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Extended fatigue in cancer disrupts self-esteem.

    “which causes a decrease in self-esteem and increases the risk of dissatisfaction with life [8, 9].”

    From Empowerment in the treatment of fatigue in breast cancer patients (2021) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Discussion reports that worsening fatigue in cancer patients is associated with poorer psychological and overall quality of life. It does not specifically address self-esteem or prolonged fatigue. Its finding about reduced satisfaction concerns patients’ experience of care, not dissatisfaction with life. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lis, C. G., Rodeghier, M., Grutsch, J. F., & Gupta, D.
Affiliations
Cancer Treatment Centers of America (US)
Corresponding author
Lis, Christopher G
Venue
BMC Health Services Research
Published
2009-10-21
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
190-190
ISSN
1472-6963 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1967293443
Cited by
86
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 6
FWCI
12.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Health Services Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
Keywords
patient satisfaction, health-related quality of life, cancer patients, fatigue, EORTC QLQ-C30, predictors of satisfaction, breast cancer, lung cancer, symptom burden, cancer care
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cancer Care Facilities, Fatigue, Female, Health Services Research, Humans, Male, Medical Oncology, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Cohort Studies, Logistic Models, Patient Satisfaction, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review