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