Patient satisfaction is linked to the amount of time spent with the physician. At the same time, long waiting times in hospitals are a major source of patient dissatisfaction. The aim of this study was to determine whether advance approval of outpatient chemotherapy (CT) via phone call can optimize healthcare delivery without compromising patient satisfaction with care. Between 2013 and 2016, 343 patients with breast/gynecological cancer scheduled to undergo CT on day 8 and/or day 15 of the CT cycle were enrolled in a before–after study conducted in a French comprehensive cancer center. In the control group, 168 patients received a face-to-face consultation with an oncologist on the day of CT for approval of the upcoming CT session. In the intervention group, 175 patients received a phone call from a healthcare provider the day before CT, where assessment of toxicity from the previous CT session was recorded and submitted to an oncologist for approval of the upcoming CT session. At the end of the 6th CT cycle, patient satisfaction was evaluated using EORTC IN-PATSAT32. A total of 233 questionnaires were analyzed (response rate: 77.7%). Satisfaction with care was similar between the two groups. No differences in perceived health status were observed, but self-reported time in hospital was lower in the intervention group than in the control group (p = 0.007). Advance approval of outpatient CT via phone call is feasible and particularly relevant in the current context of immunotherapy development.

6588 Background: Patients’ satisfaction is known to be closely linked to the time spent with the physician. However, longer waiting times may be a source of dissatisfaction as well as organizational dysfunctions of the outpatient unit. Is a validation of chemotherapy by phone call instead of a medical consultation with a senior physician before chemotherapy (CT) is feasible without compromising patients’ satisfaction and quality of life? Methods: Pts with OMS < 1, able to respond to phone call, < 76 years, receiving day 8 and or d15 of CT were included. We enrolled 343 pts in a before/after study between 2013 and 2016. In the “before” step (control arm), 168 pts had a systematic physician consultation the same day before CT administration. In the intervention arm 175 pts received a phone call by a junior physician the day preceding CT administration. A specific questionnaire for CT -related toxicity of the previous cycle was recorded and CT was validated or not by physician. The day after, pts received prepared CT without appointment with the oncologist and delay in administration for already prepared CT. At the end of CT protocol, socio demographics, patients’ satisfaction (In-PatSat32) and health status (EQ-5D) questionnaires were completed by patients. Results: Questionnaires were completed by 83% and 74% in before and after step respectively, 241 questionnaires were analyzed. Satisfaction with care showed similar In-PatSat32 scores between arms, for satisfaction with: physician, nurse, organization and services. No differences of perceived health status and toxicity were observed between both groups, but patients’ time spent in hospital was lower in the intervention group versus the control group, (p = 0.007). Conclusions: An alternative care pathway implementing phone calls before CT administration if feasible without compromising pts’ satisfaction, quality of life and toxicity. We believe that saving time of pts, physicians and pharmacists is a way to optimize the model of care in outpatient unit, particularly in the immunotherapy area with more pts received intra venous treatment, probably for a long time.