Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cross-sectional survey reports high satisfaction and recommendation rates for home-based oncology services, suggesting operational improvements.
e13603 Background: Home-based oncology services can reduce treatment burden, but patient experience data for privately funded cancer populations remain underreported in major oncology forums. We evaluated patient-reported experience, satisfaction and recommendation of a UK-based homecare oncology service to identify strengths and actionable service-improvement priorities. Methods: A cross-sectional patient experience survey was deployed to 1,100 privately funded oncology patients. Where an email address was available, invitations were issued by email; for non-responders and/or where no email address was available, two SMS reminders were sent at 7-day intervals after the initial invitation. Outcomes included overall satisfaction (CSAT), likelihood to recommend (NPS, 0–10), and free-text feedback coded into themes (overall positive/negative, clinical positive/negative, administrative positive/negative and improvement suggestions). Results: A total of 266/1,100 patients responded (24.2% response rate; typical response rate 5%). Overall satisfaction was high: 205/266 (77.1%) were extremely satisfied , 50/266 (18.8%) fairly satisfied , and 11/266 (4.1%) neutral or dissatisfied; Customer Satisfaction Score (CSAT) was 95.9% (and 98.5% when including neutral). Recommendation was also high with Net Promoter Score (NPS) 76.7 (n = 216 positives; n = 38 neutral; n = 12 negative). Free-text comments were provided by 192/266 respondents. The most frequent positive themes related to clinical care: clinical positive n = 98 (51%) and overall positive n = 137 (71%). Negative themes were concentrated in service processes rather than frontline care: admin negative n = 39 (20%) and overall negative n = 46 (24%), while clinical negative was less common (n = 15; 8%). Recurring improvement suggestions in comments included earlier/more reliable notification of visit times (e.g., narrowing the 2-hour window and confirming ETAs), improved scheduling/coordination, continuity of nursing staff, and reduction in medication/logistics errors or delays. Conclusions: Privately funded oncology patients based in the UK reported very high satisfaction and willingness to recommend home-based care, with feedback strongly endorsing frontline nursing quality. Opportunities to further improve experience are primarily operational: scheduling transparency (earlier confirmation and day-of-visit ETA), continuity, and tighter coordination across administrative functions and medication logistics. These findings support the acceptability of home-based oncology delivery while highlighting specific, actionable targets for service redesign. Additional study should be done with NHS-funded patients to confirm the experience of home-based oncology care to understand the impact across the patient population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kellie Eastlake (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: