Materials and methods: An online ‘pop-up’ survey on the Cancer learn more Care Ontario (CCO) website measured user satisfaction. Qualitative data were gathered through patient focus groups and physician interviews. On the basis of the analysis, the website was revised and usability testing conducted. The information was re-evaluated by end-users through survey methodology.
Results: The majority accessing the wait time website were patients and family members. The modal age of use of the website was 31-50 years. Patients found the information
more helpful after redesign than health professionals, but both found the language less easy to understand, highlighting the need to continuously evaluate the effectiveness of the website. Patients did not identify themselves as consumers of wait time information. Their expectation was that physicians would determine the urgency for treatment and would ensure timely access to care. Physicians reported that they did not use the CCO website on wait times and would not use the data for decision-making. Referrals were based on urgency of care and usual referral patterns. Referral patterns did not shift to centres with shorter wait times.
Conclusions: The results of this study did not confirm
the usefulness of the web-based wait time information for patients and physicians as a resource on how to obtain timely access to radiation treatment. Patients relied on their physician to manage their access to treatment according to the urgency of their CCI-779 molecular weight clinical condition. Physicians preferred their established referral process rather than referring their patients to centres with shorter wait times. As patients become more computer savvy, it will be interesting to see if they increasingly become consumers
check details of web-based wait time information. Whitton, A. C. et al. (2009). Clinical Oncology 21, 218-225 (C) 2008 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.”
“The authors investigated the sociodennographic differences in receiving a headache diagnosis for pediatric health care visits using 2 nationally representative databases the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. For those visits involving a headache diagnosis, the authors explored 2 possible disparities in care being diagnosed by a neurologist and being prescribed an evidence-based medication. A headache diagnosis was less common during visits for private insurance patients versus Medicaid patients. In addition, while a headache diagnosis was equally likely for visits by Caucasian American children versus African American children and children of other races, visits for the latter 2 groups were less likely to involve a headache diagnosis from a neurologist. Finally, only 37% of the headache visits involved a prescription of an evidence-based medication.