Surgeon-level variation in patients' appraisals of their breast cancer treatment experiences

Abstract

Background and purpose: While variation in breast cancer quality indicators has been studied, to date there have been no studies examining the degree of surgeon-level variation in patient-reported outcomes. The purpose of this study is to examine surgeon-level variation in patient appraisals of their breast cancer care experiences.

Methods: Survey responses and clinical data from breast cancer patients reported to Detroit and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registries from 6/2005 to 2/2007 were merged with attending surgeon surveys (1,780 patients, 291 surgeons). Primary outcomes were patient reports of access to care, care coordination, and decision satisfaction. Random-effects models examined variation due to individual surgeons for these three outcomes.

Results: Mean values on each patient-reported outcome scale were high. The amount of variation attributable to individual surgeons in the unconditional models was low to modest: 5.4% for access to care, 3.3% for care coordination, and 7.5% for decision satisfaction. Few factors were independently associated with patient reports of better access to or coordination of care, but less-acculturated Latina patients had lower decision satisfaction.

Conclusions: Patients reported generally positive experiences with their breast cancer treatment, though we found disparities in decision satisfaction. Individual surgeons did not substantively explain the variation in any of the patient-reported outcomes.

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

Figures

FIG. 1

Mean values for patient-reported outcomes (N = 1,495)