Congress Abstracts 2006

221

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY TOOL FOR CANCER CLINICAL TRIAL PATIENTS. Camille Servodido, RN, MPH, CRNO, OCN^®, CCRP, Edith Clark, RN, OCN^®, CCRP, and Rhea DeBari, RN, MSN, CCRP, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT; Barbara Deckers, RN, retired, Hartford, CT; and Lisa Allen, PhD, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT.

The Cancer Clinical Research Office nursing team noticed that the Press Ganey patient satisfaction surveys used at Hartford Hospital did not include questions for patients interested in cancer clinical research trials. There was no mechanism in place to evaluate patient satisfaction with the informed consent teaching session.

The research nursing team desired feedback from cancer clinical trial patients regarding customer service and educational information presented at the time of the informed consent review.

The research nurses worked with the Director of Outcomes Measurement to develop a customer survey tool designed as a post card. The survey tool was comprised of ten questions. Patients were asked about convenience of their appointment, staff courtesy, respect for privacy, explanation of what to expect during a clinical trial, explanation of side effects, completeness of information presented, ability of the research nurse to answer questions, and whether or not the patient chose to participate in a clinical trial. A five point Likert scale was used for responses ranging from very poor to excellent. In 2005, the customer satisfaction surveys were given to any potential research trial patient at the time of the informed consent session with a cancer clinical trial research nurse.

Thirty-six customer satisfaction surveys were returned. 30 to 34 (83.3% to 94.4%) patients responded with ratings of "excellent", while 2 to 6 (5.6% to 16.7%) patients responded with ratings of "good " for each question on the survey. No fair, poor, or very poor responses were noted. The patients rated questions related to concern for privacy and ability of research nurse to answer questions as highest. The patients rated explanation of side effects and completeness of information (16.7%) as lowest. 31 patients (91.2%) enrolled in a clinical trial while 3 patients (8.8%) did not.