Arthritis & Rheumatism, Volume 62,
November 2010 Abstract Supplement
Abstracts of the American College of
Rheumatology/Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals
Annual Scientific Meeting
Atlanta, Georgia November 6-11, 2010.
Multispecialty Unit for Infusion Therapy: Patient, Nursing and Provider Satisfaction.
E. Ostrov, Barbara, Reynolds, Kristine, V. Scalzi, Lisabeth
Current treatment of many complex diseases includes infusion therapy. In recent years, individuals with autoimmune diseases have been increasingly treated in infusion centers (Pat Pref Adherence 2009:3 335), second only to the long term tradition of infusion therapy for hematology-oncology (HO) patients. Patients with rheumatologic diseases may have reservations about being treated in a unit for "cancer" patients. Additionally, due to long term experience, infusion nurses may be more at ease caring for HO patients than individuals with RA, for example. Education about the different needs of non-HO patients is lacking for infusion nurses (J Infusion Nurs 2008;31:350). Therefore, in 2009, when building a new Cancer Institute, we considered moving non-hematology-oncology (non-HO) patients into a separate infusion unit. We assessed patient versus provider and staff satisfaction with the multispecialty combined unit to determine whether a separate infusion unit should be recommended.
A 7-question Likert scale survey about satisfaction with the infusion unit was collected over 2 weeks from 3 groups: infusion nurses, non-HO physicians and non-HO patients. The tool was designed to assess differences in patient satisfaction and perceived patient satisfaction by staff with our multispecialty infusion unit. Reliability of the tool was measured using Cronbach's alpha. Mean sums for all questions were calculated for individuals within their groups and analyzed using a one-way ANOVA. A post-hoc analysis was examined to determine which groups were similar.
Surveys were completed by 13 nurses, 52 non-HO patients and 18 non-HO physicians. Missing responses resulted in a total of 49 patients, 12 nurses, and 14 physicians. The tool was reliable, with good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.92). The overall mean of the 7 items in the instrument was 28.1 ± 6.8. Patients had higher satisfaction than perceived by providers and nurses across all of the items, as evidenced by higher total mean score: patients 31.3 ± 4.8, nurses 22.1 ± 6.8, physicians 21.9 ± 4.8. These results demonstrated significant intergroup differences (p<0.001) shown in the figure.
Figure 1. Mean infusion satisfaction scores by provider type.
The post-hoc analysis demonstrated that patients were significantly different from nurses and doctors (p<0.001), but nurses and doctors were not different from one another (p=0.9).
Physicians and nurses were more concerned than were patients about non-HO infusion therapy in a multispecialty but primarily cancer infusion center. Based on this survey, a combined multispecialty infusion center is acceptable to patients. Improved understanding of patient preferences were demonstrated to providers and nurses by this assessment. A follow-up survey is planned.
To cite this abstract, please use the following information:
E. Ostrov, Barbara, Reynolds, Kristine, V. Scalzi, Lisabeth; Multispecialty Unit for Infusion Therapy: Patient, Nursing and Provider Satisfaction. [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2010;62 Suppl 10 :1002