Examines improved patient understanding and satisfaction during cancer treatment, highlighting important navigation support.
Methods: Consecutive newly diagnosed breast cancer patients completed surveys at baseline (after first presentation), midpoint (after MDT review and treatment planning), and endpoint (during systemic treatment).Outcomes were understanding/ preparedness (5-point scale), baseline anxiety (5-point scale) with follow-up emotional change (improved/neutral/worsened), comfort communicating with the care team (yes/no), and satisfaction/helpfulness of navigator support (5-point scale).Within-patient changes were analyzed using Friedman tests for ordinal outcomes and Cochran's Q/McNemar tests for binary outcomes.Results: Surveys were completed by 118 (baseline), 100 (midpoint), and 98 (endpoint) patients (follow-up 84.7% and 83.1%).Understanding/preparedness improved from 1.751.08 at baseline to 3.691.17at midpoint and 3.621.03at endpoint (Friedman 2 (2)=92.51;p<0.001).Satisfaction increased from 4.400.78 to 4.660.59( 2 (2)=10.22;p=0.006); midpoint helpfulness was 4.620.74.At baseline, 65.3% were very/extremely anxious.Emotional well-being improved for 49.0% at midpoint and 59.2% at endpoint; 12.0% and 15.3% reported worsening.Comfort communicating increased from 84.7% to 93.0% and 92.9% (Cochran's Q=2.17; p=0.337).At the endpoint, 100% reported a positive impact of navigation; suggested improvements centered on streamlining investigations and reducing delays.Conclusions: Patient navigation embedded within MDT care was associated with large early gains in patient-reported understanding and very high satisfaction in an LMIC comprehensive cancer center.Scale-up should be paired with pathway optimization and proactive psychosocial support for patients with persistent distress.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jugl et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: