Skip to main content

Table 4 Univariate cox regression analysis

From: Self-rated health supersedes patient satisfaction with service quality as a predictor of survival in prostate cancer

Variable HR 95 % CI P-value
Individual PS items
Team giving you the information you need to understand your medical condition 0.45 0.24 to 0.82 0.009*
Team explaining your treatment options 0.40 0.22 to 0.73 0.003*
Team involving you in decision making as much as you preferred 0.31 0.17 to 0.56 <0.001*
Teams communicating with each other concerning your medical condition and treatment 0.37 0.21 to 0.66 0.001*
Care manager’s effectiveness in helping with your care when you are at home 0.55 0.29 to 1.06 0.08
Team treating you with respect and in a professional manner 0.39 0.17 to 0.92 0.03*
The response/call back from scheduling after you have left a message 0.75 0.37 to 1.5 0.41
Waiting time for appointments 0.51 0.29 to 0.90 0.02*
Treating medical oncologist 1.7 0.52 to 5.3 0.40
Overall PS item
Overall patient satisfaction with the institution 0.46 0.25 to 0.85 0.01*
Patient characteristics
Overall self-rated health (“not excellent” as referent) 0.25 0.11 to 0.58 0.001*
Treatment History (newly diagnosed as referent) 3.7 2.2 to 6.4 <0.001*
Stage at diagnosis (stages I-III as referent) 3.1 1.8 to 5.3 <0.001*
Age at first survey (used as a continuous variable) 1.1 1.02 to 1.1 0.002*
CTCA Hospital (overall effect)    0.06
Midwestern versus Western 2.1 0.49 to 9.0 0.32
Southwestern versus Western 4.2 0.98 to 18.2 0.06
Eastern versus Western 4.5 1.0 to 19.5 0.05*
  1. • *P <0.05
  2. • Individual and overall PS iems were dichotomized into two categories: “completely satisfied” (7) and “not completely satisfied” (1–6). “Not completely satisfied” was the referent group
  3. • Self-rated health was dichotomized into two categories: “excellent” (7) and “not excellent” (1–6). “Not excellent” was the referent group