title: Improved wait time intervals for prostate cancer patients in a multidisciplinary rapid diagnostic unit compared to a community-based referral pattern.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Wait times in cancer diagnosis and treatment may significantly affect a patient's treatment outcome, prognosis and quality of life. The purpose of this study was to capture wait time intervals for patients with prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy (RT) at the Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada and to compare patients diagnosed in a rapid diagnostic unit (RDU) versus the usual community referral process.
  
  
  METHODS
  Patients agreed to participate in the study during their RT planning sessions. A semi-structured interview and chart abstraction was conducted to record key wait time milestones.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 87 patients participated in the study: 44 RDU patients and 43 community patients. The median overall wait time intervals from suspicion of prostate cancer to RT was 138 and 183 days, respectively (p = 0.046). There were statistically significant differences observed for other key wait time intervals favouring the RDU cohort: suspicion to decision-to-treat (DTT; p = 0.012), urologist visit to diagnosis (p = 0.0094), diagnosis to DTT (p = 0.018), and diagnosis to treatment (p = 0.016). Risk category and Gleason sum was independently predictive of longer intervals from diagnosis to DTT.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Wait time intervals from suspicion to treatment are significantly shorter for prostate cancer patients in 2011 to 2012 than in 2003 when patients were diagnosed and referred in the community setting. A prostate-specific RDU further reduced a number of key wait time intervals supporting more multidisciplinary RDUs for common diseases. Further work needs to be done to identify why delays are occurring and to develop new processes to minimize delays.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON;
authors.forename: Perakaa
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Sethukavalan
authors.forename: Liying
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Zhang
authors.forename: Vibhuti
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Jethava
authors.forename: Christiaan
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Stevens
authors.forename: Stanley
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Flax
authors.forename: Roger
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Buckley
authors.forename: Susan
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Bondy
authors.forename: Andrew
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Loblaw
references.citation: Can Urol Assoc J. 2010 Aug;4(4):243-8
references.pmid: 20694099
references.citation: Lancet Oncol. 2010 Nov;11(11):1066-73
references.pmid: 20933466
references.citation: Can J Urol. 2001 Aug;8(4):1314-22
references.pmid: 11564274
references.citation: BJU Int. 2011 Dec;108(11):1734-8
references.pmid: 21507185
references.citation: Radiology. 2011 Jul;260(1):166-73
references.pmid: 21474702
references.citation: Cancer. 2005 May 15;103(10):2053-9
references.pmid: 15816048
references.citation: Br J Cancer. 2009 Jan 13;100(1):56-62
references.pmid: 19088720
references.citation: Radiother Oncol. 2011 Apr;99(1):29-36
references.pmid: 21458094
references.citation: J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010 Feb;8(2):162-200
references.pmid: 20141676