Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Impact of incoming phone calls on oncology departments in oral therapies era: a large national prospective survey

Date

09 Oct 2016

Session

Poster display

Presenters

Florence Joly Lobbedez

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2016) 27 (6): 497-521. 10.1093/annonc/mdw390

Authors

F. Joly Lobbedez1, A. Guillot2, Y. Vano3, D. Spaeth4, D. Topart5, P. Roffet6, R. El Amarti7, A. Hasbini8, A. Flechon9

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medocal Oncology, Centre Francois Baclesse, 14076 - Caen/FR
  • 2 Medical Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de la Loire, 42271 - Saint Priest en Jarez/FR
  • 3 Oncology, European Georges Pompidou Hospital, 75015 - Paris/FR
  • 4 Oncology, Centre d’Oncologie de Gentilly, 54000 - Nancy/FR
  • 5 34, Hopital Saint-Eloi (Montpellier), 34295 Cedex 5 - Montpellier/FR
  • 6 75, Pfizer, 75014 - Paris/FR
  • 7 76, Hopital Jacques Monod, 76 - Le Havre/FR
  • 8 Medical Oncology, Clinique Pasteur, 29 - Brest/FR
  • 9 Medical Oncology, Centre Léon Bérard, 69 - Lyon/FR
More

Resources

Abstract 3046

Background

Oral therapies, and an increase of patient involvement have shifted the follow-up of patients with cancer from hospital to home. As a consequence, the number of incoming phone calls (IPC) has increased. To understand the source, reasons, management and burden of IPC, we underwent a French national survey. The objective was to describe IPC and to understand the way they are managed in oncology departments.

Methods

The study was a prospective survey in a representative sample of 51 French oncology specialists (Sp) treating patients with oral therapies. Data on all IPC was collected during a one-week period in 2014. Characteristics of centers were also registered.

Results

Among 51 participating onco/radiotherapy departments, 86% of Sp were oncologists or hematologists and 14% radiation oncologists. 80% were from public centers and 20% from private ones. 41%, 39% and 20% treated less than 250, 251 to 1000 and more than 1000 new metastatic patients per year, respectively. The number of IPC/week was 17 to 64, 65 to 130 and over 130 for respectively 33%, 35% and 31% of centers (mean = 119/week). 66% of IPC were from patients and families and 23% from general practitioners. Upon IPC reception by the secretaries, half of them correspond to a medical question. A majority (65%) of centers did not have an established specific procedure and 70% of responders did not specifically train their teams (secretaries and nurses) to address the management of IPC. 65% of the sp spent more than 30 min/day. Most of them considered it disturbing medical activities. 66% of patients IPC were related to adverse effects (AE) of treatments. 22% of Sp declared at least one severe AE linked to some misinterpretation of an IPC. Centers with IPC procedures and outgoing systematic phone calls had much less IPC.

Conclusions

With the increase of oral therapies, incoming phone calls in French oncology centers (mainly patient calls who need exchanging information on AE) represent an important burden of work. To improve IPC management, recommendations are produced including dedicated procedures, trained telephone triage personnel (secretaries and dedicated nurses), standardized management of AE and documentation of answers.

Clinical trial identification

Not applicable

Legal entity responsible for the study

Pfizer France

Funding

Pfizer France

Disclosure

F. Joly Lobbedez, A. Guillot, Y. Vano, D. Spaeth, D. Topart, P. Roffet, R. El Amarti, A. Hasbini, A. Flechon: Pfizer.

Resources from the same session

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings