Determinants of patient satisfaction with cataract surgery and length of time on the waiting list.

AIMS: To assess determinants of patient satisfaction with their waiting time (WT) and cataract surgery outcome. METHODS: A prospective cohort of consecutive patients waiting for cataract surgery were assessed by their ophthalmologist. Satisfaction, maximum acceptable waiting time (MAWT), urgency, visual function, visual acuity (VA), and health related quality of life (EQ-5D) were assessed using mailed questionnaires before surgery and 8-10 weeks after surgery. Ordinal logistic regression was used to build explanatory models. RESULTS: 166 patients (61.9% female, mean age 73.4 years) had a mean WT of 16 weeks. Patients whose actual WT was shorter than their MAWT had greater odds of being satisfied with their WT than those whose WT was longer (adjusted OR 3.86, 95% CI 1.38 to 10.74). Improvement in visual function (OR 3.19, 95% CI 1.78 to 5.73), and VA (OR 4.27, 95% CI 1.70 to 10.68) significantly predicted satisfaction with surgery. Models were adjusted for age and sex. CONCLUSION: Patient perspectives on MAWT and satisfaction with WT are important inputs to the process of determining WT standards for levels of patient priority. Patient expectation of WT may mediate satisfaction with actual WT.

Waiting for scheduled services in Canada: development of priority-setting scoring systems.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: An Achilles' heel of Canadian Medicare is long waits for elective services. The Western Canada Waiting List (WCWL) project is a collaboration of 19 partner organizations committed to addressing this issue and influencing the way waiting lists are structured and managed. The focus of the WCWL project has been to develop and refine practical tools for prioritizing patients on scheduled waiting lists. METHODS: Scoring tools for priority setting were developed through extensive clinical input and highly iterative exchange by clinical panels constituted in five clinical areas: cataract surgery; general surgery procedures; hip and knee replacement; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning, and children's mental health. Several stages of empirical work were conducted to formulate and refine criteria and to assess and improve their reliability and validity. To assess the acceptability and usability of the priority-setting tools and to identify issues pertaining to implementation, key personnel in the seven regional health authorities (RHAs) participated in structured interviews. Public opinion focus groups were conducted in the seven western cities. RESULTS: Point-count scoring systems were constructed in each of the clinical areas. Participating clinicians confirmed that the tools offered face validity and that the scoring systems appeared practical for implementation and use in clinical settings. Reliability was strongest for the general surgery and hip and knee criteria, and weakest for the diagnostic MRI criteria. Public opinion focus groups endorsed wholeheartedly the application of point-count priority measures. Regional health authorities were generally supportive, though cautiously optimistic towards implementation. CONCLUSIONS: While the WCWL project has not 'solved' the problem of waiting lists and times, having a standardized, reliable means of assigning priority for services is an important step towards improved management in Canada and elsewhere.