Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22037653›Full record

ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2011

[Survey of potential improvements during the course of the radiotherapy treatment--a patient questionnaire].

Felix Momm, David Jooss, Carola J Xander, Sonja Adebahr, Viola Duncker-Rohr, Felix Heinemann, Simon Kirste, Marc-Benjamin Messmer, Anca-Ligia Grosu, Gerhild Becker

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. [Patients in radiotherapy].Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2012
    Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Felix MommKlinik für Strahlenheilkunde, Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Freiburg i. Br., Germany. felix.momm@uniklinik-freiburg.de
David Jooss
Carola J Xander
Sonja Adebahr
Viola Duncker-Rohr
Felix Heinemann
Simon Kirste
Marc-Benjamin Messmer
Anca-Ligia Grosu
Gerhild Becker
University Medical Center Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND

backgroundIn the context of quality assurance, increasing demands are placed on the whole radiotherapy treatment process. The patients directly concerned generally do not realize most aspects of the quality assurance program (e.g., additional safety checks) during their daily therapy. It was the aim of this study to systematically ask patients about potential improvements during the course of radiotherapy treatment from their own perspective. PATIENTS AND

methodsIn the defined time span (1 month), 624 radiotherapy patients (600 questionnaires were returned, 96.2%) were interviewed using a questionnaire newly developed to inquire about several aspects of their treatment. Furthermore, they were asked for their specific needs and suggestions for improvements that could be made during the course of radiotherapy treatment.

resultsOverall, the patients were satisfied with the course of their radiotherapy treatment and with patient care. As an example, about 90% agreed with the statement: "My first contact with the radiation oncology unit proceeded with kindness and competence so that I was given the impression that I will be well cared for in this clinic." Considering the organization of the course of radiotherapy, a large majority of patients attached great value to set appointments for the therapy fractions. A main point of criticism was waiting times or delays caused by servicing or machine failures. Small, low cost improvements as music in the therapy room were considered as important as expensive measures (e.g., daylight in the therapy room). The patients emphasized the importance of staff friendliness.

conclusionThe situation of radiotherapy patients was, in general, satisfactory. Future improvements can be mainly expected from smooth organisation of both planning and treatment which can be achieved by electronic scheduling systems. Many results of the survey could be easily implemented in daily practice. In matters of organization radiation oncology with its complex procedures can be used as a model for other clinical departments.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionQuality ImprovementRadiotherapySurveys and QuestionnairesFemaleGermanyHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansMaleNeoplasmsPatient Care PlanningPatient Education as TopicPatient SafetyProfessional-Patient RelationsQuality Assurance, Health CareQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID22037653
OpenAlexW96031468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.