Telehealth in radiation oncology at the Townsville Cancer Centre: Service evaluation and patient satisfaction. (February 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hamilton, Elizabeth; Van Veldhuizen, Ellie; Brown, Amy; Brennan, Sean; Sabesan, Sabe
• Is Part Of: Clinical and translational radiation oncology. Volume 15(2019)
• Page Start: 20
• Page End: 25
• Publication Date: 2019-02
• Subjects: Radiation oncology -- Telemedicine -- Patient care -- Patient satisfaction; Cancer -- Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Oncology -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Radiotherapy; Oncology; Radiation Oncology; Neoplasms -- radiotherapy; Translational Medical Research; Periodicals; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.9940642
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2018.11.005
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2405-6308

Abstract

Highlights: Telehealth serviced a range of ages, cancer diagnoses and treatment intents. Tele-radiation oncology consultations reduced travel and time burden for patients. Patients reported an overall high level of satisfaction with telehealth consultation. Abstract: Purpose: Telehealth (TH) in Radiation Oncology at Townsville Cancer Centre (TCC) was implemented in July 2011 to provide cancer care closer to home to the regional and rural population. The aim of this study was to describe the service use and patient satisfaction. Materials and methods: A retrospective audit of records was conducted for patients treated at TCC between July 2011 and December 2015. Data included patient demographics, diagnosis and treatment. Results of a patient satisfaction survey were summarised through descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 1530 TH consultations were provided to 833 patients. 311 patient charts were audited (615 TH, 650 in-person, 151 phone consultations). Median distance from TCC to satellites was 327.3 km (21.6 to 1130.1). 71% were male and median age was 65 (23–94 years). Cancer diagnoses included prostate (32%), breast (12%) and head and neck (10%). 60% of patients underwent radiation therapy for curative intent, 22% palliative and 18% did not undergo treatment. 106 patients participated in the satisfaction survey (231 patients invited, response rate of 46%), with the overall positive response mainly attributed to advantages in travel and time savings. 54.7% of patients selected TH as their preference for future consultations, 34.9% indicated a mix of TH and in-person consultations, and only 1 patient (0.9%) indicating in-person only. Conclusion: TH enables the delivery of radiation oncology consultations to rural and regional patients, with an overall high level of patient satisfaction. Patients welcomed the model for benefits of travel and time savings. Future directions include engaging with specialist, rural medical staff and patients to maximize access.