All.Can Patient Survey

2. Information, support and shared decision-making In qualitative responses, respondents said that they felt overwhelmed because too much information was given at once , and they would have preferred to receive relevant information at appropriate points along the entire care pathway. Nearly a third of respondents ( 31% ) felt they were not given adequate information about their cancer care and treatment in a way that they could understand. Additionally, only half of respondents ( 53% ) felt they were sufficiently involved in making decisions about their care. Key opportunities identified to improve efficiency in cancer care Overall, the majority of survey respondents reported that their needs were sufficiently addressed during their care. However, the survey highlighted four crucial areas where respondents reported that they experienced inefficiency and where there are opportunities for improvement. 1. Swift, accurate and appropriately delivered diagnosis Diagnosis was not always communicated to respondents in the most appropriate way. Respondents sometimes reported a lack of empathy from physicians, along with poor timing. For example, some were told they had cancer without a family member present, or had to wait several days to speak to a specialist after receiving their diagnosis. When asked to select the one area of cancer care where they experienced the most inefficiency, 26% of respondents chose diagnosis –more than any other area of cancer care. Across all cancer types, 58% of respondents had their cancer detected outside of a screening programme. As might be expected, this varied considerably by cancer type. Among respondents whose cancer was detected outside of a screening programme, delayed diagnosis (>6 months) was associated with a more negative patient view of all aspects of care and support. Time to diagnosis varied significantly by cancer type: nearly 80% of prostate cancer respondents whose cancer was detected outside of screening said their cancer was diagnosed in less than a month, while for head and neck cancer respondents diagnosed outside of screening this was only 25% . Nearly a third ( 32% ) of respondents whose cancer was detected outside of a screening programme reported that their cancer was initially diagnosed as something different – and, again, this varied considerably by cancer type. 08