Dataset Information

Enhanced involvement of general practitioners in cancer rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: To test the hypothesis that a multimodal intervention giving the general practitioner (GP) an enhanced role in cancer rehabilitation improves patients' health-related quality of life and psychological distress.Cluster randomised controlled trial. All general practices in Denmark were randomised to an intervention group or to a control group. Patients were subsequently allocated to intervention or control (usual procedures) based on the randomisation status of their GP.All clinical departments at a public regional hospital treating cancer patients and all general practices in Denmark.Adult patients treated for incident cancer at Vejle Hospital, Denmark, between 12 May 2008 and 28 February 2009. A total of 955 patients (486 to the intervention group and 469 to the control group) registered with 323 general practices were included.The intervention included an interview about rehabilitation needs with a rehabilitation coordinator at the regional hospital, information from the hospital to the GP about individual needs for rehabilitation and an encouragement of the GP to contact the patient to offer his support with rehabilitation.The primary outcome was health-related quality of life measured 6 months after inclusion using the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Secondary outcomes included quality of life at 14 months and additional subscales of the EORTC QLQ-C30 at 6 and 14 months and psychological distress at 14 months using the Profile of Mood States Scale.No effect of the intervention was observed on primary and/or secondary outcomes after 6 and 14 months.A multimodal intervention aiming to give the GP an enhanced role in cancer patients' rehabilitation did not improve quality of life or psychological distress.ClinicalTrials.gov, registration ID number NCT01021371.

SUBMITTER: Bergholdt SH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3332246 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Enhanced involvement of general practitioners in cancer rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial.

Bergholdt Stinne Holm SH Larsen Pia Veldt PV Kragstrup Jakob J Søndergaard Jens J Hansen Dorte Gilså DG

BMJ open 20120416 2

<h4>Objective</h4>To test the hypothesis that a multimodal intervention giving the general practitioner (GP) an enhanced role in cancer rehabilitation improves patients' health-related quality of life and psychological distress.<h4>Design</h4>Cluster randomised controlled trial. All general practices in Denmark were randomised to an intervention group or to a control group. Patients were subsequently allocated to intervention or control (usual procedures) based on the randomisation status of the ...[more]

PMID: 22508956

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo test whether a complex intervention facilitating early cancer rehabilitation by involvement of the general practitioner (GP) soon after diagnosis improves patients' satisfaction with their GPs.DesignA cluster randomised controlled trial. All general practices in Denmark were randomised to an intervention or a control group before the start of the study. Patients included those with cancer who were subsequently allocated to either group based on the randomisation status of their GP.ParticipantsAdult patients with cancer treated for incident cancer at the public regional hospital (Vejle Hospital, Denmark) were included between May 2008 and February 2009. A total of 955 patients registered with 323 practices were included, of which 486 patients were allocated to the intervention group and 469 to the control group.InterventionThe intervention included a patient interview assessing the need for rehabilitation, improved information from the hospital to GPs including information on the patients' current needs along with information about needs of patients with cancer in general. Further, GPs were encouraged to proactively contact the patients and facilitate the patients' rehabilitation course.Outcome measures6 months after inclusion of the patient, patient satisfaction with their GP during the last 12 months in five different dimensions of GP care was assessed using the Danish version of the EuroPEP (European Patients Evaluate General Practice Care) questionnaire (DanPEP). 14 months after inclusion, patient satisfaction with the GP regarding the cancer course and GP's satisfaction with own contribution to the patients' rehabilitation course were assessed using ad hoc questions specifically designed for this study.ResultsNo overall effect of the intervention was observed. Subgroup analysis of the patients with breast cancer showed statistically significant improvement of satisfaction with the GP in two of the five DanPEP dimensions.ConclusionsThis complex intervention aiming at improving GPs' services in cancer rehabilitation had no impact on patient satisfaction.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, registration ID number NCT01021371.

Project description:General Practitioners (GPs) play an important role in the follow-up of patients after deliberate self-poisoning (DSP). The aim was to examine whether structured follow-up by GPs increased the content of, adherence to, and satisfaction with treatment after discharge from emergency departments.This was a multicentre, randomised trial with blinded assignment. Five emergency departments and general practices in the catchment area participated. 202 patients discharged from emergency departments after DSP were assigned. The intervention was structured follow-up by the GP over a 6-month period with a minimum of five consultations, accompanied by written guidelines for the GPs with suggestions for motivating patients to follow treatment, assessing personal problems and suicidal ideation, and availability in the case of suicidal crisis. Outcome measures were data retrieved from the Register for the control and payment of reimbursements to health service providers (KUHR) and by questionnaires mailed to patients and GPs. After 3 and 6 months, the frequency and content of GP contact, and adherence to GP consultations and treatment in general were registered. Satisfaction with general treatment received and with the GP was measured by the EUROPEP scale.Patients in the intervention group received significantly more consultations than the control group (mean 6.7 vs. 4.5 (p = 0.004)). The intervention group was significantly more satisfied with the time their GP took to listen to their personal problems (93.1% vs. 59.4% (p = 0.002)) and with the fact that the GP included them in medical decisions (87.5% vs. 54. 8% (p = 0.009)). The intervention group was significantly more satisfied with the treatment in general than the control group (79% vs. 51% (p = 0.026)).Guidelines and structured, enhanced follow-up by the GP after the discharge of the DSP patient increased the number of consultations and satisfaction with aftercare in general practice. Consistently with previous research, there is still a need for interventional studies.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01342809. Registered 18 April 2011.

Project description:To assess whether systematic follow-up by general practitioners (GPs) of cases of deliberate self-poisoning (DSP) by their patients decreases psychiatric symptoms and suicidal behaviour compared with current practice.Randomised clinical trial with two parallel groups.General practices in Oslo and the eastern part of Akershus County.Patients aged 18-75 years admitted to hospital for DSP. We excluded patients diagnosed with psychoses, without a known GP, those not able to complete a questionnaire, and patients admitted to psychiatric in-patient care or other institutions where their GP could not follow them immediately after discharge.The GPs received a written guideline, contacted the patients and scheduled a consultation within one week after discharge, and then provided regular consultations for six months. We randomised the patients to either intervention (n = 78) or treatment as usual (n = 98).Primary outcome measure was the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (SSI). Secondary outcomes were Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS), self-reported further self-harm and treatment for DSP in a general hospital or an emergency medical agency (EMA). We assessed patients on entry to the trial and at three and six months. We collected data from interviews, self-report questionnaires, and hospital and EMA medical records.There were no significant differences between the groups in SSI, BDI, or BHS mean scores or change from baseline to three or six months. During follow-up, self-reported DSP was 39.5% in the intervention group vs. 15.8% in controls (P = 0.009). Readmissions to general hospitals were similar (13% in both groups (P = 0.963), while DSP episodes treated at EMAs were 17% in the intervention group and 7% in the control group (P = 0.103).Structured follow-up by GPs after an episode of DSP had no significant effect on suicide ideation, depression or hopelessness. There was no significant difference in repeated episodes of DSP in hospitals or EMAs. However, the total number of incidents of deliberate self-harm reported by the patients was significantly higher in the intervention group.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01342809.

Project description:No efficacy studies of influenza vaccination given to GPs have yet been published. Therefore, our purpose was to assess the effect of an inactivated influenza vaccine given to GPs on the rate of clinical respiratory tract infections (RTIs) and proven influenza cases (influenza positive nose and throat swabs and a 4-fold titre rise), while adjusting for important covariates.In a controlled trial during two consecutive winter periods (2002-2003 and 2003-2004) we compared (77 and 100) vaccinated with (45 and 40) unvaccinated GPs working in Flanders, Belgium. Influenza antibodies were measured immediately prior to and 3-5 weeks after vaccination, as well as after the influenza epidemic. During the influenza epidemic, GPs had to record their contact with influenza cases and their own RTI symptoms every day. If they became ill, the GPs had to take nose and throat swabs during the first 4 days. We performed a multivariate regression analysis for covariates using Generalized Estimating Equations.One half of the GPs (vaccinated or not) developed an RTI during the 2 influenza epidemics. During the two influenza periods, 8.6% of the vaccinated and 14.7% of the unvaccinated GPs had positive swabs for influenza (RR: 0.59; 95%CI: 0.28 - 1.24). Multivariate analysis revealed that influenza vaccination prevented RTIs and swab-positive influenza only among young GPs (ORadj: 0.35; 95%CI: 0.13 - 0.96 and 0.1; 0.01 - 0.75 respectively for 30-year-old GPs). Independent of vaccination, a low basic antibody titre against influenza (ORadj 0.57; 95%CI: 0.37 - 0.89) and the presence of influenza cases in the family (ORadj 9.24; 95%CI: 2.91 - 29) were highly predictive of an episode of swab-positive influenza.Influenza vaccination was shown to protect against proven influenza among young GPs. GPs, vaccinated or not, who are very vulnerable to influenza are those who have a low basic immunity against influenza and, in particular, those who have family members who develop influenza.

Dataset Information

Enhanced involvement of general practitioners in cancer rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Enhanced involvement of general practitioners in cancer rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets