During June-July 2016, the CLL Society conducted a poll among readers of the Q2 2016 issue of The CLL Tribune. The survey included questions on the types of physicians treating respondents (community versus academic or both), whether they had stayed with the same physician who made the diagnosis and the reasons why they changed, as well as the most important attributes they look for when choosing a physician to treat/monitor their CLL. We also asked respondents whether they would recommend their CLL doctor and created a list that is posted in the Tool Box on the Home Page of our website.
- Of the 261 complete responses received:
- Average age – 64 (range 35-90)
- 43% Male; 57% Female
- 84% of respondents reside in the United States
Forty-four percent of respondents report that their CLL is managed by a hematologist/oncologist (H/O) at an academic center. One-third are managed by both a community and an academic hem/onc. [Figure 1]
Over half of respondents have changed to a different physician to manage their CLL since the time of their diagnosis. [Figure 2]The most common reason was that they requested a second opinion from a CLL expert who is now part of their CLL Team (47%), followed by a lack of confidence in the expertise of the community hem/onc to manage their CLL (33%). [Table 1]
Using a scale where 1=not important and 5=most important, respondents rated the attributes that were important to them when selecting the physician that manages their CLL. The top 4 attributes were: Physician makes me feel comfortable discussing my CLL (95%), physician treats many patients with CLL (93%), physician encourages me to participate in the medication decision making for my CLL (90%), and physician is responsive to my emails and/or phone calls (83%). (% reflect combined ratings of 4 & 5) [Figure 3]
Thank you to all who participated in the Reader Poll! Your feedback is very important to us and we appreciate the time you spend participating.
Let us know what topics you’d like us to cover in 2017, what we’re doing well and what we could do better.
Originally published in The CLL Tribune Q3 2016.