Search

In response to breast cancer diagnostic regional wait times exceeding both national and provincial standards and to symptomatic patient referrals for diagnostic mammography taking longer than abnormal screening mammography referrals, the Rae Fawcett Breast Health Clinic (RFBHC) was opened in 2017 in a mid-sized Canadian hospital serving both urban and rural-remote communities. We investigated whether the RFBHC improved wait times to breast cancer diagnosis, improved compliance with national and provincial breast cancer standards, and decreased the wait time disparity associated with referral source. Statistical analyses of wait time differences were conducted between patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer prior to and after the RFBHC establishment. Study group compliance with national and provincial standards and wait time differences by referral source were also analysed. A survey was administered to assess overall patient experience with the RFBHC and clinic wait times. RFBHC patients had a shorter mean wait to breast cancer diagnosis (24.4 vs. 45.7 days, p ≤ 0.001) and a shorter mean wait to initial breast cancer treatment (49.1 vs. 78.9 days, p ≤ 0.001) than pre-RFBHC patients. After the RFBHC establishment, patients who attended the RFBHC had a shorter mean wait time to breast cancer diagnosis (24.4 vs. 36.9 days, p = 0.005) and to initial treatment (49.1 vs. 73.1 days, p ≤ 0.001) than patients who did not attend the clinic. Compliance with national and provincial breast cancer standards improved after the RFBHC establishment and the wait time disparity between screening mammography referrals and symptomatic patient referrals decreased. Survey results indicate that the RFBHC is meeting patient expectations. We concluded that the establishment of a breast health clinic in a Canadian center serving urban and rural-remote communities improved breast diagnostic services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A mismatch between patient demand and emergency departments (EDs)' capacity to deliver care often leads to poor patient flow and overcrowding, and therefore an increase in waiting. This paper presents a mid-term decision support system dealing with scheduling and allocation of resources in the ED of the Hospital Center of Troyes, France. An efficient performance evaluation tool based on discrete event simulation (DES) is developed. Through a what-if scenario strategy, 145 scenarios were simulated that allowed us to create a new benchmark that does not exist in the literature. To rank and select the best alternatives, the VIKOR multicriteria analysis method and the entropy method were used. With the objective of minimizing the waiting time and inpatient stay under an additional resource cost constraint, this work has helped to quantify and analyze the impacts related to the structural and organizational reorganization of the ED. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide, with a five-year survival of 22% in Canada. Guidelines recommend rapid evaluation of patients with suspected lung cancer, but the impact on survival remains unclear. We reviewed medical records of all patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer in four hospital networks across the province of Quebec, Canada, between 1 February and 30 April 2017. Patients were followed for 3 years. Wait times for diagnosis and treatment were collected, and survival analysis using a Cox regression model was conducted. We included 1309 patients, of whom 39% had stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Median wait times were, in general, significantly shorter in patients with stage III–IV NSCLC or SCLC. Surgery was associated with delays compared to other types of treatments. Median survival was 12.9 (11.1–15.7) months. The multivariate survival model included age, female sex, performance status, histology and stage, treatment, and the time interval between diagnosis and treatment. Longer wait times had a slightly protective to neutral effect on survival, but this was not significant in the stage I–II NSCLC subgroup. Wait times for the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer were generally within targets. The shorter wait times observed for advanced NSCLC and SCLC might indicate a tendency for clinicians to act quicker on sicker patients. This study did not demonstrate the detrimental effect of longer wait times on survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: Wait times to chemotherapy are associated with morbidity and mortality in breast cancer patients; however, it is unclear how primary care physician (PCP) continuity impacts these wait times, or whether this association is different in immigrants, who experience cancer care inequities. We assessed the association between PCP continuity and the contact-to-chemotherapy interval (wait time from when a patient first presents to healthcare to the first day of receiving breast cancer chemotherapy), with a specific look at the immigrant population. (2) Methods: Populationbased, retrospective cohort study of women who were diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer in Ontario who received surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. We used quantile regression at the median and 90th percentile to quantify the effect of PCP continuity on the contact-to-chemotherapy interval, performing a separate analysis on the immigrant population. (3) Results: Among 12,781 breast cancer patients, including 1706 immigrants, the median contact-to-chemotherapy interval (126 days) was 3.21 days shorter (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-5.96) in symptom-detected patients with low PCP continuity, 10.68 days shorter (95% CI 5.36-16.00) in symptom-detected patients with no baseline PCP visits and 17.43 days longer (95% CI 0.90-34.76) in screen-detected immigrants with low PCP continuity compared to the same groups with high PCP continuity. (4) Conclusions: Higher PCP continuity was not associated with a change in the contact-to-chemotherapy interval for most of our study population, but was associated with a marginally longer interval in our symptom-detected population and a shorter contact-to-chemotherapy interval in screen-detected immigrants. This highlights the importance of PCP continuity among immigrants with positive screening results. Additionally, having no PCP visits at baseline was associated with a shorter contact-to-chemotherapy interval in symptom-detected patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The novel coronavirus of 2019 has had a broad impact of the delivery of healthcare, including cancer care. We chose to quantify the impact in the radiation oncology department of the largest academic center in the hardest hit city in Canada. With the approval of our ethics review board, data on each patient treated from March 13, 2020 to August 10, 2020 were compared to patients treated during the same period in 2019. We compared the case mix, delay from treatment decision to treatment start, and number of fractions per patient. We reviewed prospectively collected information regarding deviations from our usual practice. During the pandemic the caseload was reduced by 12%; this was more pronounced in prostate and CNS tumors. The average number of fractions per patient was reduced from 12.3 to 10.9. This reduction was most marked in prostate, breast, gastro-intestinal, and palliative cases. When physicians were questioned, they reported that 17% of treatment plans deviated from their usual practice because of the pandemic. The most common deviations were related to changes in department policies (77%) vs. patient-specific deviations (20%) or changes requested by the patient (3%). Rare deviations were due to patients contracting COVID-19 (2 patients). At its worse, the wait list contained 27% of patients who had a delay to radiotherapy of more than 28 days. However, the average wait time increased little (19.6 days vs. 18.2 days) as more pressing cases were prioritized. In an unprecedented health crisis, our radiation oncology department was able to reduce resource utilization, notably by decreasing the number of fractions per patient. It will be important to follow these patients' health outcomes for insight into these practices. More quantitative tools to simulate and plan future practice changes in response to resource constraints will be implemented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Patients with lung cancer often experience stressful delays throughout the diagnostic phase of care. To address that situation, our multidisciplinary team created a “Navigation Day,” during which patients partake in a single-day visit that comprises nurse-led teaching, social work, smoking cessation counselling, symptom control, and dedicated test slots for integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT), pulmonary function tests (PFTS), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain. We evaluated the effects of that program on wait times and patient satisfaction. Methods Patients with a suspicion of lung cancer on chest CT imaging referred during 3 time periods were reviewed: 1 year before launch of the Navigation Day, 1 year post-launch, and 2 years post-launch. Patients were further stratified according to concordance of their test date with a Navigation Day date. Mean wait times for pet/ct, PFTS, and MRI brain were calculated for each group. Patient satisfaction was measured using a standardized provincial survey. The Student t-test and analysis of variance were used to assess for significance. Results After implementation, mean wait times in the first year improved to 9.2 days from 15.5 days for PET/CT (p < 0.0001), to 9.6 days from 15.7 days for PFTS (p < 0.0001), and to 10.2 days from 16.0 days for MRI brain (p < 0.0001). Patients who used a dedicated test slot experienced the shortest wait times, at 5.8 days for PET/CT, 5.8 days for PFTS, and 6.3 days for MRI brain (p < 0.0001). Those improvements were sustained at 2 years post-launch. Patient satisfaction in the categories of assistance, emotional support, and clarity remained high post-launch. Conclusions Navigation Day significantly improved the timeliness of diagnostic testing services in patients with suspected lung cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Operating room slowdowns occur at specific intervals in the year as a cost-saving measure. We aim to investigate the impact of these slowdowns on the care of oral cavity cancer patients at a Canadian tertiary care centre. Methods A total of 585 oral cavity cancer patients seen between 1999 and 2015 at the London Health Science Centre (lhsc) Head and Neck Multidisciplinary Clinic were included in this study. Operating room hours and patient load from 2006 to 2014 were calculated. Our primary endpoint was the wait time from consultation to definitive surgery. Exposure variables were defined according to wait time intervals occurring during time periods with reduced operating room hours. Results Overall case volume rose significantly from 2006 to 2014 (p < 0.001), while operating room hours remained stable (p = 0.555). Patient wait times for surgery increased from 16.3 days prior to 2003 to 25.5 days in 2015 (p = 0.008). Significant variability in operating room hours was observed by month, with lowest reported for July and August (p = 0.002). The greater the exposure to these months, the more likely patients were to wait longer than 28 days for surgery (odds ratio per day [or]: 1.07, 95% confidence interval [ci]: 1.05 to 1.10, p < 0.001). Individuals seen in consultation preceding a month with below average operating room hours had a higher risk of disease recurrence and/or death (hazard ratio [hr]: 1.59, 95% ci: 1.10 to 2.30, p = 0.014). Conclusions Scheduled reductions in available operating room hours contribute to prolonged wait times and higher disease recurrence. Further work is needed to identify strategies maximizing efficient use of health care resources without negatively affecting patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Multiple clinical practice guidelines recommend rapid evaluation of patients with suspected lung cancer. It is uncertain whether delays in diagnosis and management have a negative effect on outcomes. Methods This retrospective study included 551 patients diagnosed with lung cancer through the diagnostic assessment program at the Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec between September 2013 and March 2015. Median wait times between initial referral, diagnosis, and first treatment were calculated and compared with recommended targets. Analyses were performed to evaluate for specific factors associated with longer wait times and for the effect of delays on the outcomes of progression-free survival (PFS), relapse-free survival (RFS) after primary surgical resection, and overall survival (OS). Results Most patients were investigated and treated within recommended targets. Of the entire cohort, 379 patients were treated at our institution. Of those 379 patients, 311 (82%) were treated within recommended targets. In comparing patients within and outside target times, the only statistically significant difference was found in the distribution of treatment modalities: patients meeting targets were more likely to be treated with surgery or chemotherapy rather than with radiation. The PFS on first treatment modality was influenced by clinical stage, but not by time to therapy [hazard ratio (hr): 1.10; p = 0.65]. The OS for the entire cohort was also influenced by stage, but not by delays (hr: 1.04; p = 0.87). For the 209 patients treated by surgery with curative intent, a significant reduction in RFS was associated with male sex and TNM stage, but not with delays (hr: 1.11; p = 0.83). The OS after primary surgical resection was also associated with TNM stage, but not with delays (hr: 1.82; p = 0.43). Conclusions Recommended targets for wait times in the investigation and treatment of lung cancer can be achieved within a diagnostic assessment program. Compared with radiation treatment, treatment with surgery or chemotherapy is more likely to be completed within targets. Delays in investigation and treatment do not appear to negatively affect the clinical outcomes of OS, RFS, and PFS. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate whether efficient work-up and treatment influence other important variables, such as quality of life, cost of care, and access to therapies while performance status is adequate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Lung cancer continues to be one of the most common cancers in Canada, with approximately 28,400 new cases diagnosed each year. Although timely care can contribute substantially to quality of life for patients, it remains unclear whether it also improves patient outcomes. In this work, we used a set of quality indicators that aim to describe the quality of care in lung cancer patients. We assessed adherence with existing guidelines for timeliness of lung cancer care and concordance with existing standards of treatment, and we examined the association between timeliness of care and lung cancer survival. Methods Patients with lung cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were identified from the Pulmonary Division Lung Cancer Registry at our centre. Results We demonstrated that the interdisciplinary pulmonary oncology service successfully treated most of its patients within the recommended wait times. However, there is still work to be done to decrease variation in wait time. Our results demonstrate a significant association between wait time and survival, supporting the need for clinicians to optimize the patient care trajectory. Interpretation It would be helpful for Canadian clinicians treating patients with lung cancer to have wait time guidelines for all treatment modalities, together with standard definitions for all time intervals. Any reductions in wait times should be balanced against the need for thorough investigation before initiating treatment. We believe that our unique model of care leads to an acceleration of diagnostic steps. Avoiding any delay associated with referral to a medical oncologist for treatment could be an acceptable strategy with respect to reducing wait time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In 2009, a Rapid Access Breast Clinic (RABC) was opened at our urban hospital. Compared with the traditional system (TS), the navigated care through the clinic was associated with a significantly shorter time to surgical consultation. Since 2009, many radiology facilities have introduced facilitated-care pathways for patients with breast pathology. Our objective was to determine if that change in diagnostic imaging pathways had eliminated the advantage in time to care previously shown for the RABC. Methods All patients seen in the RABC and the office-based TS in November-December 2012 were included in the analysis. A retrospective chart review tabulated demographic, surgeon, pathology, and radiologic data, including time intervals to care for all patients. The results were compared with data from 2009. Results In 2012, time from presentation to surgical consultation was less for the RABC group than for the TS group (36 days vs. 73 days, p < 0.001) for both malignant (31 days vs. 55 days, p = 0.008) and benign diagnoses (43 days vs. 79 days, p < 0.001). Comparing the 2012 results with results from 2009, a decline in mean wait time was observed for the TS group (86 days vs. 73 days, p = 0.02). Compared with patients having investigations in the TS, RABC patients with cancer were more likely to undergo surgery within 60 days of presentation (33% vs. 15%, p = 0.04). Conclusions The coordination of radiology and clinical care reduces wait times for diagnosis and surgery in breast cancer. To achieve recommended targets, we recommend implementation of more systematic coordination of care for a breast cancer diagnosis and of navigation to surgeons for patients needing surgical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Efforts to streamline the diagnosis and treatment of breast abnormalities are necessary to limit patient anxiety and expedite care. In the present study, we examined the effect of a rapid diagnostic unit (RDU) on wait times to clinical investigations and definitive treatment. Methods A retrospective before-after series, each considering a 1-year period, examined consecutive patients with suspicious breast lesions before and after initiation of the RDU. Patient consultations, clinical investigations, and lesion characteristics were captured from time of patient referral to initiation of definitive treatment. Outcomes included time (days) to clinical investigations, to delivery of diagnosis, and to management. Groups were compared using the Fisher exact test or Student t-test. Results The non-RDU group included 287 patients with 164 invasive breast carcinomas. The RDU group included 260 patients with 154 invasive carcinomas. The RDU patients had more single visits for biopsy (92% RDU vs. 78% non-RDU, p < 0.0001). The RDU group also had a significantly shorter wait time from initial consultation to delivery of diagnosis (mean: 2.1 days vs. 16.7 days, p = 0.0001) and a greater chance of receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (37% vs. 24%, p = 0.0106). Overall time from referral to management remained statistically unchanged (mean: 53 days with the RDU vs. 50 days without the RDU, p = 0.3806). Conclusions Introduction of a rdu appears to reduce wait times to definitive diagnosis, but not to treatment initiation, suggesting that obstacles to care delivery can occur at several points along the diagnostic trajectory. Multipronged efforts to reduce system-related delays to definitive treatment are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background This study set out to identify patterns in the causes of waits and wait-related satisfaction. Methods We conducted qualitative interviews with urban, semi-urban, and rural patients (n = 60) to explore their perceptions of the waits they experienced in the detection and treatment of their breast, prostate, lung, or colorectal cancer. We asked participants to describe their experiences from the onset of symptoms to the start of treatment at the cancer clinic and their satisfaction with waits at various intervals. Interview transcripts were coded using a thematic approach. Results Patients identified five groups of wait-time causes: • Patient-related (beliefs, preferences, and non-cancer health issues) • Treatment-related (natural consequences of treatment) • System-related (the organization or functioning of groups, workforce, institution, or infrastructure in the health care system) • Physician-related (a single physician responsible for a specific element in the patient's care) • Other causes (disruptions to normal operations of a city or community as a whole) With the limited exception of physician-related absences, the nature of the cause was not linked to overall satisfaction or dissatisfaction with waits. Conclusions Causes in themselves do not explain wait-related satisfaction. Further work is needed to explore the underlying reasons for wait-related satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Although our findings shed light on patient experiences with the health system and identify where interventions could help to inform the expectations of patients and the public with respect to wait time, more research is needed to understand wait-related satisfaction among cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We have recently reported a 35% drop in new lung cancer diagnoses and a 64% drop in lung cancer surgeries during the first year of the pandemic., Methods: The target population was divided into three cohorts: pre-COVID-19 (2019), first year of COVID-19 (2020), and second year of COVID-19 (2021)., Results: The number of new lung cancer diagnoses during the second year of the pandemic increased by 75%, with more than 50% being in the advanced/metastatic stage. There was a significant increase in cases with multiple extrathoracic sites of metastases during the pandemic. During the first year of the pandemic, significantly more patients were treated with radiosurgery compared to the pre-COVID-19 year. During the second year, the number of radiosurgery and surgical cases returned to pre-COVID-19 levels. No significant changes were observed in systemic chemotherapy and targeted therapy. No statistical difference was identified in the mean wait time for diagnosis and treatment during the three years of observation. However, the wait time for surgery was prolonged compared to the pre-COVID-19 cohort., Conclusions: The significant drop in new diagnoses of lung cancer during the first year of the pandemic was followed by an almost two-fold increase in the second year, with the increased rate of metastatic disease with multiple extra-thoracic site metastases. Limited access to surgery resulted in the more frequent use of radiosurgery.

Long wait times and crowding are major issues affecting outpatient service delivery, but it is unclear how these affect patients in dual practice settings. This study aims to evaluate the effects of changing consultation start time and patient arrival on wait times and crowding in an outpatient clinic with a dual practice system. A discrete event simulation (DES) model was developed based on real-world data from an Obstetrics and Gynaecology (O&G) clinic in a public hospital. Data on patient flow, resource availability, and time taken for registration and clinic processes for public and private patients were sourced from stakeholder discussion and time-motion study (TMS), while arrival times were sourced from the hospital's information system database. Probability distributions were used to fit these input data in the model. Scenario analyses involved configurations on consultation start time/staggered patient arrival. The median registration and clinic turnaround times (TT) were significantly different between public and private patients (p < 0.01). Public patients have longer wait times than private patients in this study's dual practice setting. Scenario analyses showed that early consultation start time that matches patient arrival time and staggered arrival could reduce the overall TT for public and private patients by 40% and 21%, respectively. Similarly, the number of patients waiting at the clinic per hour could be reduced by 10–21% during clinic peak hours. Matching consultation start time with staggered patient arrival can potentially reduce wait times and crowding, especially for public patients, without incurring additional resource needs and help narrow the wait time gap between public and private patients. Healthcare managers and policymakers can consider simulation approaches for the monitoring and improvement of healthcare operational efficiency to meet rising healthcare demand and costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective We set out to review the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program (RRRP). Methods We retrospectively reviewed a prospective database of patients referred to the RRRP between August 1, 2008, and June 30, 2012, extracting patient demographics, case dispositions, and wait times in days from referral to consultation and from consultation to treatment. Results Of 2742 patients referred to the RRRP, 1458 (53%) were men, and 1284 (47%) were women. Median age was 64 years. The most prevalent primary cancer sites were lung (33%), breast (21%), and prostate (17%). The most common reasons for referral were bone metastases (53%) and brain metastases (21%). Palliative radiation therapy was given to 1890 patients. The median wait time from referral to consultation was 3 days. Among treated patients, 60% were treated on the day of their consultation, and 33%, within 1-6 days. Conclusions The RRRP continues to deliver timely palliative radiation therapy to patients, comparable to earlier reviews. The continued success of the RRRP will remain a model for future rapid-access palliative radiation therapy clinics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Treatment uptake and elapsed times along the care path have emerged as potential quality indicators for cancer care delivery. This retrospective study examined changes in adjuvant chemotherapy uptake and elapsed times along the care path for patients in 2005 and in 2007 who had early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) and who underwent curative-intent surgery in Nova Scotia, Canada. Methods All patients who underwent curative-intent surgery for stages i-iii nsclc in the two years of interest were included. Logistic regression and general linear models were used to examine factors associated with chemotherapy uptake patterns and, at various resolutions (low, intermediate, high), elapsed times between all care events in the care path. Results In the 223 patients who underwent curative-intent surgery (108 in 2005, 115 in 2007), several factors were associated with uptake patterns and elapsed times. Cohort year (2007 vs. 2005) was not associated with referral to medical oncology [odds ratio (or): 1.05; 95% confidence interval (ci): 0.51 to 2.15; p = 0.905], but it was associated with less treatment after referral (or: 0.34; 95% ci: 0.11 to 1.00; p = 0.057) and less overall uptake (or: 0.35; 95% ci: 0.13 to 0.95; p = 0.040). Patients were referred sooner to medical oncology in 2007 than in 2005 (21 days vs. 35 days, p = 0.008), but experienced longer waits between consultation and chemotherapy delivery (18 days vs. 7 days, p = 0.001). Conclusions Significant differences were observed in care patterns over time. Frequent monitoring of care patterns at high resolution may optimize insights into emerging trends within cancer care systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The novel coronavirus of 2019 has had a broad impact of the delivery of healthcare, including cancer care. We chose to quantify the impact in the radiation oncology department of the largest academic center in the hardest hit city in Canada. With the approval of our ethics review board, data on each patient treated from March 13, 2020 to August 10, 2020 were compared to patients treated during the same period in 2019. We compared the case mix, delay from treatment decision to treatment start, and number of fractions per patient. We reviewed prospectively collected information regarding deviations from our usual practice. During the pandemic the caseload was reduced by 12%; this was more pronounced in prostate and CNS tumors. The average number of fractions per patient was reduced from 12.3 to 10.9. This reduction was most marked in prostate, breast, gastro-intestinal, and palliative cases. When physicians were questioned, they reported that 17% of treatment plans deviated from their usual practice because of the pandemic. The most common deviations were related to changes in department policies (77%) vs. patient-specific deviations (20%) or changes requested by the patient (3%). Rare deviations were due to patients contracting COVID-19 (2 patients). At its worse, the wait list contained 27% of patients who had a delay to radiotherapy of more than 28 days. However, the average wait time increased little (19.6 days vs. 18.2 days) as more pressing cases were prioritized. In an unprecedented health crisis, our radiation oncology department was able to reduce resource utilization, notably by decreasing the number of fractions per patient. It will be important to follow these patients' health outcomes for insight into these practices. More quantitative tools to simulate and plan future practice changes in response to resource constraints will be implemented.

Background: Understanding factors relating to the perception of wait time by patients is key to improving the patient experience., Methods: We surveyed 122 breast and 90 prostate cancer patients presenting at clinics or listed on the cancer registry in Newfoundland and Labrador and reviewed their charts. We compared the wait time (first visit to diagnosis) and the wait-related satisfaction for breast and prostate cancer patients who received regular screening tests and whose cancer was screening test-detected ("screen/screen"); who received regular screening tests and whose cancer was symptomatic ("screen/symptomatic"); who did not receive regular screening tests and whose cancer was screen test-detected ("no screen/screen"); and who did not receive regular screening tests and whose cancer was symptomatic ("no screen/symptomatic")., Results: Although there were no group differences with respect to having a long wait (greater than the median of 47.5 days) for breast cancer patients (47.8% screen/screen, 54.7% screen/symptomatic, 50.0% no screen/ screen, 40.0% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.814), a smaller proportion of the screen/symptomatic patients were satisfied with their wait (72.5% screen/ screen, 56.4% screen/symptomatic, 100% no screen/ screen, 90.9% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.048). A larger proportion of screen/symptomatic prostate cancer patients had long waits (>104.5 days: 41.3% screen/screen, 92.0% screen/symptomatic, 46.0% no screen/screen, 40.0% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.011) and a smaller proportion of screen/ symptomatic patients were satisfied with their wait (71.2% screen/screen, 30.8% screen/symptomatic, 76.9% no screen/screen, 90.9% no screen/symptomatic; p = 0.008)., Conclusions: Diagnosis-related wait times and satisfaction were poorest among patients who received regular screening tests but whose cancer was not detected by those tests.

Introduction: Our study examined the wait time from ready-to-treat to radiation therapy for cohorts of breast cancer patients requiring adjuvant radiation therapy in 2001 and in 2005 after the implementation of strategies to reduce wait times for radiation treatment. We also examined the overall time from diagnosis to radiation treatment and whether distance from the cancer treatment centre or month of referral had an effect on wait times., Methods: This population-based retrospective study looked at representative samples of women newly diagnosed with breast cancer in 2001 and 2005. Patients who required radiation treatment to the breast or chest wall were followed from first contact to the start of radiation treatment., Results: Time from ready-to-treat to first radiation treatment was significantly reduced for patients in 2005 as compared with 2001, regardless of whether chemotherapy was administered before radiation treatment. Time from diagnosis to radiation treatment was not different by year for those who received radiation only. Time from diagnosis to chemotherapy was significantly longer in 2005. No effect of month of diagnosis on wait times was observed., Interpretation: A significant improvement in the median wait time from ready-to-treat to first radiation treatment was noted from 2001 to 2005. This improvement may be attributable to measures taken to reduce such waits. However, we observed an increase in the median time from diagnosis to referral and from referral to consultation with medical or radiation oncology (or both), so that the overall time from diagnosis to radiation treatment was not different. Although specific intervals related to radiation treatment delivery were improved, the entire trajectory of breast cancer care experienced by patients needs to be considered.