A quality improvement activity to promote interprofessional collaboration among health professions students.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and evaluate a classroom-based curriculum designed to promote interprofessional competencies by having undergraduate students from various health professions work together on system-based problems using quality improvement (QI) methods and tools to improve patient-centered care. DESIGN: Students from 4 health care programs (nursing, nutrition, pharmacy, and physical therapy) participated in an interprofessional QI activity. In groups of 6 or 7, students completed pre-intervention and post-intervention reflection tools on attitudes relating to interprofessio nal teams, and a tool designed to evaluate group process. ASSESSMENT: One hundred thirty-four students (76.6%) completed both self-reflection instruments, and 132 (74.2%) completed the post-course group evaluation instrument. Although already high prior to the activity, students' mean post-intervention reflection scores increased for 12 of 16 items. Post-intervention group evaluation scores reflected a high level of satisfaction with the experience. CONCLUSION: Use of a quality-based case study and QI methodology were an effective approach to enhancing interprofessional experiences among students.

Waiting time for breast cancer treatment in Alberta.

BACKGROUND: The present study had two research questions. First, what is the average waiting time between diagnosis and treatment for Alberta women with breast cancer relative to Canadian Society for Surgical Oncology (CSSO) recommendations? Second, does patient age, cancer stage, patient community size, and year of diagnosis have a significant relationship to waiting time? METHODS: The sample consisted of all Alberta women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2000. Waiting time was defined as number of days between definitive diagnosis and treatment initiation. Multiple regression examined the relative influence of the predictor variables on waiting time. RESULTS: There were 6,418 cases of breast cancer between 1997 and 2000. Mean waiting time was 20.2 days (SD 21.6) and median waiting time was 17 days. Longer waiting time was significantly associated with year of diagnosis (progressively longer from 1997 to 2000), patients younger than 70, and Stage 1 cancer. Waiting time increase from 1997 to 2000 appears to be due to increased demand for services without corresponding increases in resources. Less treatment delay for women older than 70 is due to more of these women being treated the same day they received their diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Only 44% of women had a waiting time of 14 days or less as recommended by the CSSO. The number of women who will have to wait longer than recommended for treatment will likely increase without a significant increase in oncological resources. The basis for differences in waiting times as a function of age needs to be further investigated to ensure equitable access to care.