Accessibility and Barriers to Oncology Appointments at 40 National Cancer Institute–Designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers: Results of a Mystery Shopper Project

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. e884-e900 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey S. Hamlyn ◽  
Kathryn E. Hutchins ◽  
Abby L. Johnston ◽  
Rishonda T. Thomas ◽  
James Tian ◽  
...  

Purpose: Patients turn to National Cancer Institute (NCI) –designated comprehensive cancer centers because of perceived better quality and more timely access to care. However, recent studies have found that patients at various institutions may struggle to gain access to an appointment or obtain consistent information from attendants. Our study employs a mystery shopper format to identify and quantify barriers faced by patients seeking to make a first consultation appointment across a homogenous sample of 40 NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers. Methods: Five mystery shoppers used a standardized call script to inquire about first available appointment times and service offerings. Results: When inquiring about a date for a first available appointment, 29% of callers were unable to secure an estimated date without registering into the center’s database, 51% were able to secure an estimated date, and 20% were provided with an actual date. Of estimated or actual dates for a first available appointment, 74% were greater than 1 week away. There was no statistically significant variation between appointment availability across insurance type or US region. Conclusion: Our study highlights the difficulty of accessing information about appointment availability. Although not statistically significant, inquiries regarding first available appointments for Medicaid patients resulted in longer estimated or actual wait times than those for patients with private insurance, and Medicaid shoppers noted qualitative differences. Although our study was limited by small sample size and imperfect analytic methods, our results suggest the need for more efficient and accessible care for patients at our nation’s top cancer centers.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 55-55
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Hamlyn ◽  
Kathryn Hutchins ◽  
Abby Johnston ◽  
Rishonda Thomas ◽  
James Tian ◽  
...  

55 Background: Newly diagnosed cancer patients face fear and uncertainty regarding their prognosis and treatment options. As a first step, these patients and their family members may reach out to top-tier, comprehensive cancer centers for evaluation and treatment; however, recent literature reveals barriers to access. To identify these barriers, we evaluated obstacles patients and caregivers face in accessing services at major cancer centers. Methods: We used a ‘mystery shopper’ format to contact 40 NCI-designated, comprehensive cancer centers. We simulated a patient’s family member calling to make an initial consultation appointment using a standardized script. Each center received four calls on separate dates – two calls presented a patient with private insurance; two with Medicaid. Call order and patient name were randomized. We evaluated quantitative and qualitative components of the call, including time to next available appointment and availability of supportive services. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each quantitative measure. Results: We placed 160 calls to 40 NCI-designated cancer centers. 117 (73%) of calls were first answered by electronic prompts or voicemail, not a live person. Mean call duration was 9.4 minutes, with a range of 1 to 31.9 minutes. On average, callers spent 7.1 minutes speaking to an attendant and spent 2.4 minutes on hold or being transferred. Only a minority of callers (19.3%) were able to obtain an actual date for a next-available appointment without first registering into the cancer center’s records system. 51.3% were given an estimated date for a next-available appointment and 29.4% were told that a date for an appointment could not be estimated unless the patient was registered. When an appointment date was given (estimated or actual), only 27% were within a week. Specifically, only 1.3% of next-available appointments were within 1-2 days, 25.7% were within 3-7 days, 57.5% were within 7-14 days, 15% were not available until > 14 days. At the most extreme, the next-available appointment was not for 37 days. Conclusions: NCI-designated cancer centers often place significant roadblocks in front of patients and caregivers seeking an appointment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. 5351-5358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonia S. Kupfer ◽  
Sam Lubner ◽  
Emmanuel Coronel ◽  
Perry J. Pickhardt ◽  
Matthew Tipping ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 917-925 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila L. Hammer ◽  
Karen Clark ◽  
Marcia Grant ◽  
Matthew J. Loscalzo

AbstractObjective:We replicated a 1994 study that surveyed the state of supportive care services due to changes in the field and the increased need for such services. We provide an updated assessment, comparing the changes that have occurred and describing the current status of supportive care services in comprehensive cancer settings.Method:We used Coluzzi and colleague's 60-question survey from their 1995 Journal of Clinical Oncology article to frame the 98-question survey employed in the current study. Medical and palliative care directors for the 2011 National Cancer Institute (NCI) comprehensive cancer centers were surveyed regarding their supportive care services and their subjective review of the overall effectiveness of the services provided.Results:We achieved a 76% response rate (n = 31). The data revealed increases in the number of cancer beds in the hospitals, the degree of integration of supportive care services, the availability of complementary services, and the number of pain and palliative care services offered. There was also an overall shift toward centers becoming more patient centered, as 65% reported now having a patient and family advisory council. Our findings revealed a growing trend to offer distress screening for both outpatients and inpatients. Medical and palliative care directors' evaluations of the supportive care services they offered also significantly improved. However, the results revealed an ongoing gap in services for end-of-life care and timely referrals for hospice services.Significance of results:Overall, both the quantity and quality of supportive care services in the surveyed NCI-designated cancer centers has improved.


Health Equity ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 84-90
Author(s):  
Patricia M. Doykos ◽  
Moon S. Chen ◽  
Karriem Watson ◽  
Vida Henderson ◽  
Monica L. Baskin ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7) ◽  
pp. 547-558 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew B. Schabath ◽  
Catherine A. Blackburn ◽  
Megan E. Sutter ◽  
Peter A. Kanetsky ◽  
Susan T. Vadaparampil ◽  
...  

PURPOSE To identify potential gaps in attitudes, knowledge, and institutional practices toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) patients, a national survey of oncologists at National Cancer Institute–Designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers was conducted to measure these attributes related to LGBTQ patients and desire for future training and education. METHODS A random sample of 450 oncologists from 45 cancer centers was selected from the American Medical Association’s Physician Masterfile to complete a survey measuring attitudes and knowledge about LGBTQ health and institutional practices. Results were quantified using descriptive and stratified analyses and by a novel attitude summary measure. RESULTS Of the 149 respondents, there was high agreement (65.8%) regarding the importance of knowing the gender identity of patients, which was contrasted by low agreement (39.6%) regarding the importance of knowing sexual orientation. There was high interest in receiving education regarding the unique health needs of LGBTQ patients (70.4%), and knowledge questions yielded high percentages of “neutral” and “do not know or prefer not to answer” responses. After completing the survey, there was a significant decrease ( P < .001) in confidence in knowledge of health needs for LGB (53.1% agreed they were confident during survey assessment v 38.9% postsurvey) and transgender patients (36.9% v 19.5% postsurvey). Stratified analyses revealed some but limited influence on attitudes and knowledge by having LGBTQ friends and/or family members, political affiliation, oncology specialty, years since graduation, and respondents’ region of the country. CONCLUSION This was the first nationwide study, to our knowledge, of oncologists assessing attitudes, knowledge, and institutional practices of LGBTQ patients with cancer. Overall, there was limited knowledge about LGBTQ health and cancer needs but a high interest in receiving education regarding this community.


2015 ◽  
Vol 220 (5) ◽  
pp. 940-950 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Bristow ◽  
Jenny Chang ◽  
Argyrios Ziogas ◽  
Belinda Campos ◽  
Leo R. Chavez ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 357-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel B. Epstein ◽  
Ira R. Parker ◽  
Matthew S. Epstein ◽  
Anurag Gupta ◽  
Susan Kutis ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document