Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

DrKimberleyFoley

Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health

Research Associate
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

k.foley

 
 
//

Location

 

319Reynolds BuildingCharing Cross Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Foley:2018:10.5750/ejpch.v6i4.1564,
author = {Foley, KA and Groome, PA and Peng, Y and Feldman-Stewart, D and Brundage, MD and Mackillop, WJ},
doi = {10.5750/ejpch.v6i4.1564},
journal = {European Journal for Person Centered Healthcare},
pages = {621--621},
title = {Identifying priorities for improvement of the quality of personal care in patients undergoing radiotherapy for prostate cancer},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.5750/ejpch.v6i4.1564},
volume = {6},
year = {2018}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - <jats:p>Background: We previously developed a questionnaire to assess the quality of personal care in prostate cancer radiotherapy. Patients are asked to rate the importance of 143 elements of their care and to rate the quality of their care for each element. In order to improve the quality of care delivered to patients, the elements of care most in need of improvement must be identified.Objective: To develop a method of integrating ratings of importance and ratings of quality to identify elements of care that should become targets for quality improvement.Methods: We surveyed 108 patients undergoing radiotherapy for prostate cancer. We developed 3 methods to identify elements of care to target for quality improvement that were important to the patient(s) and suboptimal in quality. Spearman correlation was used to compare ranking of priorities across all 3 methods. Generalized estimating equations were used to assess the statistical ability of the methods to discriminate between priorities for quality improvement.Results: Integrating importance and quality ratings identified different priorities than using quality ratings alone. Two of the integrated methods identified priorities for quality improvement and their ranks similarly (r=0.91, p<0.0001). All methods identified elements related to communication of information about the disease and its treatment as priorities.Conclusions: Two methods produced similar results although one is easier to understand and theoretically superior since the ratings for importance and quality are linked for each individual. Further consultation with stakeholders will determine how to use these results as part of a quality improvement program.</jats:p>
AU  - Foley,KA
AU  - Groome,PA
AU  - Peng,Y
AU  - Feldman-Stewart,D
AU  - Brundage,MD
AU  - Mackillop,WJ
DO  - 10.5750/ejpch.v6i4.1564
EP  - 621
PY  - 2018///
SN  - 2052-5648
SP  - 621
TI  - Identifying priorities for improvement of the quality of personal care in patients undergoing radiotherapy for prostate cancer
T2  - European Journal for Person Centered Healthcare
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.5750/ejpch.v6i4.1564
VL  - 6
ER  -
Download