Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pilot evaluation of a French interdisciplinary supportive care department

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of the study

This pilot study was designed to evaluate the impact of management by the Interdisciplinary Supportive Care Department for Cancer Patients (Département Interdisciplinaire de Soins de Support pour le Patient en Oncologie—DISSPO) at the Institut Curie in Paris, France on patient quality of life and satisfaction with care.

Materials and methods

Patients hospitalised for cancer treatment and referred to DISSPO during their hospitalisation were invited to complete the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer core quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) and patient satisfaction (EORTC IN-PATSAT32) questionnaires during the week following their initial management by DISSPO (T0) and 2 months later (T1). These patients were compared with control patients matched for age, gender, ward and period of hospitalisation in terms of quality of life and satisfaction with care.

Main results

One hundred fourteen (77%) DISSPO patients at T0 and 72 (48%) patients at T1 and 102 (89%) control patients at T0 and 66 (57%) at T1 returned their completed questionnaires. Baseline characteristics of DISSPO patients and control patients were significantly different in terms of duration of the current hospitalisation, interval between the date of diagnosis of the cancer and inclusion in the study (both longer for DISSPO patients) and Karnofsky performance status (lower for DISSPO patients). For the 43 pairs of patients who completed the questionnaires at the two time points, significant independent positive effects of management by DISSPO and age (less than or equal to 60 years) were demonstrated for patient satisfaction in relation to the availability of the nursing and paramedical team. In particular, patients over the age of 60 not managed by DISSPO presented a significant reduction of patient satisfaction scores over the 2 months compared to age-matched patients managed by DISSPO.

Conclusions

Management of cancer patients by an interdisciplinary supportive care department appears to have a positive impact on patient satisfaction in relation to availability of the nursing and paramedical team. These results need to be confirmed in a larger study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, Filiberti A, Flechtner H, Fleishman SB, de Haes JC et al (1993) The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality of life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:365–376. doi:10.1093/jnci/85.5.365

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Aranda S, Schofield P, Weih L, Yates P, Milne D, Faulkner R, Voudouris N (2005) Mapping the quality of life and unmet needs of urban women with metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 14(3):211–222. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2354.2005.00541.x

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. ARHIF (Regional Agency for Hospital Stay in Ile-De-France) (2008) Regional Schema for Health Organisation —Cancer Care. French Republic

  4. Ayanian JZ, Zaslavsky AM, Guadagnoli E, Fuchs CS, Yost KJ, Creech CM, Cress RD, O'Connor LC, West DW, Wright WE (2005) Patients' perceptions of quality of care for colorectal cancer by race, ethnicity, and language. J Clin Oncol 23(27):6576–6586. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.06.102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Barg FK, Cronholm PF, Straton JB, Keddem S, Knott K, Grater J, Houts P, Palmer SC (2007) Unmet psychosocial needs of Pennsylvanians with cancer: 1986–2005. Cancer 110:631–639. doi:10.1002/cncr.22820

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Brédart A, Razavi D, Robertson C, Didier F, Scaffidi E, Fonzo D, Autier P, de Haes JC (2001) Assessment of quality of care in an oncology institute using information on patients’ satisfaction. Oncology 61:120–128. doi:10.1159/000055362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Brédart A, Mignot V, Rousseau A, Beauloye N, Adam V, Elie C, Léonard I, Conroy T (2004) Validation of the EORTC QLQ-SAT32 cancer inpatient satisfaction questionnaire by self-versus interview-assessment comparison. Patient Educ Couns 54(2):207–212. doi:10.1016/S0738-3991(03)00210-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Brédart A, Bottomley A, Blazeby JM, Conroy T, Coens C, D’Haese S, Chie WC, Hammerlid E, Arraras JI, Efficace F, Rodary C, Schraub S, Costantini M, Costantini A, Joly F, Sezer O, Razavi D, Mehlitz M, Bielska-Lasota M, Aaronson NK, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Group and Quality of Life Unit (2005) An International Prospective Study of the Psychometric Properties of the EORTC QLQ-SAT32 in assessing cancer patient perception of the quality of care received in the hospital. Eur J Cancer 41:2120–2131. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2005.04.041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Colussi AM, Mazzer L, Candotto D, De Biasi M, De Lorenzi L, Pin I, Pusiol N, Romanin C, Zamattio V (2001) The elderly cancer patient: a nursing perspective. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 39:235–245. doi:10.1016/S1040-8428(00)00116-5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Engel GL (1980) The clinical application of the biopsychosocial model. Am J Psychiatry 137:535–544

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fitch MI, Gray RE, Mcgowan T, Brunskill I, Steggles S, Sellick S, Bezjak A, McLeese D (2005) Travelling for radiation cancer treatment: patient satisfaction. Can Oncol Nurs J 15(2):107–119

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gesell SB, Gregory N (2004) Identifying priority actions for improving patient satisfaction with outpatient cancer care. J Nurs Care Qual 19(3):226–233

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gourdji I, McVey L, Loiselle C (2003) Patients' satisfaction and importance ratings of quality in an outpatient oncology center. J Nurs Care Qual 18(1):43–55

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gysels M, Higginson IJ, Rajasekaran M, Davies E, Harding R (2004) Guidance on cancer services improving supportive and palliative care for adults with cancer. Research evidence. National Institute for Clinical Excellence, London

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hodgkinson K, Butow P, Hunt GE, Wyse R, Hobbs KM, Wain G (2007) Life after cancer: couples' and partners' psychological adjustment and supportive care needs. Support Care Cancer 15(4):405–415. doi:10.1007/s00520-006-0148-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hurria A, Lichtman SM, Gardes J, Li D, Limaye S, Patil S, Zuckerman E, Tew W, Hamlin P, Abou-Alfa GK, Lachs M, Kelly E (2007) Identifying vulnerable older adults with cancer: integrating geriatric assessment into oncology practice. J Am Geriatr Soc 55(10):1604–1608. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01367.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jacobsen PB (2009) Promoting evidence-based psychosocial care for cancer patients. Psychooncology 18(1):6–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Krakowski I, Boureau F, Bugat R, Chassignol L, Colombat P, Copel L, d'Hérouville D, Filbet M, Laurent B, Memran N, Meynadier J, Parmentier G, Poulain P, Saltel P, Serin D, Wagner JP (2004) For a coordination of the supportive care for people affected by severe illnesses: proposition of organization in the public and private health care centres. Bull Cancer 91:449–456

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Landen CN Jr, Younger NO, Collins Sharp BA, Underwood PB (2003) Cancer patients' satisfaction with physicians: Princess Margaret Hospital satisfaction with Doctor Questionnaire results. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188(5):1177–1179. doi:10.1067/mob.2003.281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Li J, Girgis A (2006) Supportive care needs: are patients with lung cancer a neglected population? Psychooncology 15(6):509–516. doi:10.1002/pon.983

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lintz K, Moynihan C, Steginga S, Norman A, Eeles R, Huddart R, Dearnaley D, Watson M (2003) Prostate cancer patients' support and psychological care needs: survey from a non-surgical oncology clinic. Psychooncology 12(8):769–783. doi:10.1002/pon.702

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. McLachlan SA, Allenby A, Matthews J, Wirth A, Kissane D, Bishop M, Beresford J, Zalcberg J (2001) Randomized trial of coordinated psychosocial interventions based on patient self-assessments versus standard care to improve the psychosocial functioning of patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 19:4117–4125

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mead N, Bower P (2000) Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Soc Sci Med 51(7):1087–1110. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00098-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, Lawton R, Parker D, Walker A, “Psychological Theory” Group (2005) Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. Qual Saf Health Care 14(1):26–33

    Google Scholar 

  25. Osoba D, Bezjak A, Brundage M, Zee B, Tu D, Pater J, Quality of Life Committee of the NCIC CTG (2005) Analysis and interpretation of health-related quality-of-life data from clinical trials: basic approach of The National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Eur J Cancer 41(2):280–287. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2004.10.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rummans TA, Clark MM, Sloan JA, Frost MH, Bostwick JM, Atherton PJ, Johnson ME, Gamble G, Richardson J, Brown P, Martensen J, Miller J, Piderman K, Huschka M, Girardi J, Hanson J (2006) Impacting quality of life for patients with advanced cancer with a structured multidisciplinary intervention: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 24:635–642. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.06.209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sanson-Fisher R, Girgis A, Boyes A, Bonevski B, Burton L, Cook P (2000) The unmet supportive care needs of patients with cancer. Supportive Care Review Group. Cancer 88:226–237. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(20000101)88:1<226::AID-CNCR30>3.0.CO;2-P

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Smith DP, Supramaniam R, King MT, Ward J, Berry M, Armstrong BK (2007) Age, health, and education determine supportive care needs of men younger than 70 years with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 25(18):2560–2566. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.09.8046

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Soothill K, Morris SM, Harman J, Francis B, Thomas C, McIllmurray MB (2001) The significant unmet needs of cancer patients: probing psychosocial concerns. Support Care Cancer 9(8):597–605. doi:10.1007/s005200100278

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Speroff T, O'Connor GT (2004) Study designs for PDSA quality improvement research. Qual Manag Health Care 13(1):17–32

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. von Plessen C, Aslaksen A (2005) Improving the quality of palliative care for ambulatory patients with lung cancer. BMJ 330(7503):1309–1313. doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7503.1309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Wiggers JH, Donovan KO, Redman S, Sanson-Fisher RW (1990) Cancer patient satisfaction with care. Cancer 66(3):610–616. doi:10.1002/1097-0142(19900801)66:3<610::AID-CNCR2820660335>3.0.CO;2-T

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wen KY, Gustafson DH (2004) Needs assessment for cancer patients and their families. Health Qual Life Outcomes 26(2):11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Whelan TJ, Mohide EA, Willan AR, Arnold A, Tew M, Sellick S, Gafni A, Levine MN (1997) The supportive care needs of newly diagnosed cancer patients attending a regional cancer center. Cancer 80(8):1518–1524. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19971015)80:8<1518::AID-CNCR21>3.0.CO;2-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was conducted with the support of a grant from the Haute Autorité de Santé, France. We thank Virginie Baille-Barrelle, Yaël Storch, Florence Box and Delphine Marmion for their help in collecting data and are most grateful to all patients who kindly agreed to participate in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psycho-Oncology Unit, Institut Curie, 26 rue d’Ulm, 75.246, Paris Cedex 05, France

    Anne Brédart & Sylvie Dolbeault

  2. Biostatistics Service, Institut Curie, Paris, France

    Alexia Savignoni, Stéphanie Gomme & Bernard Asselain

  3. Supportive and Continuous Care Unit, Institut Curie, Paris, France

    Laure Copel

  4. University Paris-Sud and University Paris Descartes, UMR-SO669, INSERM U669, Paris, France

    Sylvie Dolbeault

  5. Laval University, School of Psychology, Québec, Canada

    Sébastien Simard

  6. University Paris-Sud and University Paris-V, INSERM, Paris, France

    Sylvie Dolbeault

  7. Psychology Institute, University Paris Descartes, Paris, France

    Anne Brédart

Authors
  1. Anne Brédart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sylvie Dolbeault
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alexia Savignoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sébastien Simard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stéphanie Gomme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Bernard Asselain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Laure Copel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne Brédart.

Appendix

Appendix

DISSPO referral criteria list

This checklist is designed to identify cancer patients with complex care needs. Its purpose is to help oncology providers to screen patients that need to be referred to one or more of the DISSPO unit(s). This checklist must be completed for each new patient in the ward. The “complex” patient meets at least one criterion for at least two DISSPO units. Once identified, the complex patient is referred the DISSPO secretariat.

figure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brédart, A., Dolbeault, S., Savignoni, A. et al. Pilot evaluation of a French interdisciplinary supportive care department. Support Care Cancer 17, 1507–1516 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-009-0617-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-009-0617-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation