Follow-up care for cancer survivors: the views of clinicians.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Greenfield DM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2736807 | biostudies-other | 2009 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND: Since the launch of the National Cancer Survivorship Initiative, there has been a surge of interest surrounding the value and organisation of long-term follow-up care after cancer treatment. We report the views of 309 adult cancer survivors (aged 18-45 years) on provision of follow-up and preferences for care. METHODS: A total of 207 survivors completed questionnaires before and after routine consultant-led follow-up appointments and 102 were recruited by post. Measures of health status (including late effects, perceived vulnerability to late effects and quality of life), reasons for attending follow-up (clinical and supportive), issues to be discussed at follow-up and preferences for different models of care were assessed. RESULTS: In all, 59% of the survivors reported experiencing one or more cancer-related health problems. Survivors rated clinical reasons for attending follow-up more highly than supportive reasons (P<0.001), although nutritional advice and counselling were considered useful (60 and 47%, respectively). Those still receiving scheduled follow-up appointments did not discuss the range of issues intended with 'late effects' and 'fertility', which were particularly under-discussed. Hospital rather than GP follow-up was more highly rated. CONCLUSION: Survivors value the clinical reassurance currently provided by consultant-led care. However, supportive needs are not systematically addressed. Multi-disciplinary services are recommended to meet supportive needs in addition to clinical care.
| S-EPMC2736810 | biostudies-other
Project description:Breast cancer survivorship guidelines recommend at least annual follow-up visits, yet the degree to which this occurs in clinical practice is uncertain. Claims data from a US commercial insurance database (OptumLabs) were used to identify women treated with curative intent surgery for newly diagnosed breast cancer between 2006 and 2014. In 25 035 women, median follow-up was 3 years. In the second year after surgery, 9.6% of the patients did not visit a primary care provider, an oncologist, or a surgeon (guideline-nonadherent). The guideline-nonadherent proportion increased from 7.8% in women diagnosed in 2006 to 12.2% in those diagnosed in 2014 (two-sided Wald P < .001). During years 2-6, guideline-nonadherence was also associated with older age, nonwhite race, no radiation, no chemotherapy, no endocrine therapy, and increasing time after surgery. There is a substantial and increasing rate of inadequate follow-up among breast cancer survivors. This has the potential to impair outcomes.
| S-EPMC7849972 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThough the need for risk-based follow-up care for survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer has been documented, survivors often report forgoing recommended care due to cost. We sought to understand whether additional barriers to follow-up care exist for AYA survivors.MethodsWe recruited survivors who were diagnosed with cancer between the ages of 15 and 39 using the Utah Cancer Registry (UCR). Overall, 28 survivors participated in 6 focus groups held between March and May 2015 in Salt Lake City and St. George, UT. Focus group discussions focused on the reasons survivors may or may not attend recommended medical visits after completing therapy.ResultsSurvivors reported myriad barriers to follow-up medical visits, including lack of clear provider recommendation, fear of recurrent cancer diagnosis, wishing to move on with life, competing life responsibilities due to work and children, and not perceiving the need for a visit due to lack of symptoms.ConclusionsThough cost likely plays a major part in follow-up care adherence for survivors of AYA cancer, in our focus groups, participants indicated there were many other psychosocial and logistic barriers to care. Such factors play an important role in the day-to-day lives of survivors and are critical in medical decision-making.Implications for cancer survivorsSeveral factors impede follow-up care adherence for survivors of AYA cancer that are amenable to interventions, including clearer provider recommendations, flexible appointment times, and childcare availability in clinics.
| S-EPMC5526603 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Institute of Medicine has identified patients as a key source of information for assessing the quality of care.To evaluate the association of physician specialty with the content and quality of follow-up cancer care.Three hundred three colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors in Northern California were surveyed 2-5 years post-diagnosis.Specialty of physician seen most often [primary care physician (PCP), oncologist, surgeon, or gastroenterologist]; other physician specialties seen; patient characteristics; content of visits; patient-centered quality of follow-up care (communication, coordination, nursing, and staff interactions).A minority (16%) of CRC survivors reported that the doctor they most often saw for follow-up cancer care was a PCP, while 60% saw an oncologist. Many CRC survivors (40%) saw >1 physician for follow-up cancer care. Survivors most often seen by PCPs were more likely to have three or more medical comorbidities (70% vs. 51%, p = 0.012) than survivors seen by subspecialty physicians. Survivors seen by PCPs were less likely to report seeing a doctor for medical tests and more likely to report discussing disease prevention (82% vs. 64%, p = 0.012) or diet (70% vs. 48%, p = 0.005) with their doctor. There were no significant specialty differences in patient-centered quality of follow-up cancer care.Cancer survivors' assessment of the quality of care was similar across specialties, while the content of follow-up cancer care varied by physician specialty. These findings provide important information about the potential value of primary care and the need for coordination when delivering care to CRC survivors.
| S-EPMC2763150 | biostudies-other
Project description:Follow-up care is critical for childhood cancer survivors (CCS), who are at high risk for comorbidities and late effects of cancer treatments. Understanding the factors associated with maintaining follow-up care is needed, especially for Hispanic CCS, who have been under-represented in previous studies.Risk factors and protective factors for receiving cancer-related follow-up care were examined among 193 Los Angeles County CCS diagnosed between 2000 and 2007 (54% Hispanic; mean ± standard deviation age, 19.9 ± 2.8 years; age at diagnosis, 12.1 ± 3.0 years; time since diagnosis, 7.8 ± 2.0 years). Self-report surveys were used to assess follow-up care, insurance status, demographics, clinical factors, and psychosocial risk (eg, depression) and protective (eg, self-efficacy [SE]) factors. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with the previous receipt of cancer-related follow-up care (in prior 2 years) and the intent to seek future cancer-related follow-up care.Seventy-three percent of CCS reported a cancer follow-up visit in the previous 2 years, which was positively associated (P <?.05) with having health insurance, white ethnicity (vs Hispanic), younger age, and greater treatment intensity. Sixty-nine percent reported an intent to receive follow-up care in the next 2 years, which was positively associated (P < .05) with having health insurance and greater SE.Hispanics and older CCS were more likely to lack previous follow-up care. Because health insurance was strongly associated with both previous follow-up care and the intent to seek care, the current results indicate that recent changes in health coverage may improve follow-up among CCS. Interventions targeting improved SE may help increase intent to receive follow-up care for this population.
| S-EPMC4319982 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeWe examined cancer survivors' experience of bothersome symptoms, association of symptom bother with health-related quality of life (HRQOL), survivors' perception of symptom care, and their symptom-related information needs.MethodsUsing self-report survey measures, survivors of leukemia, bladder, or colorectal cancer who were 2-5 years post-diagnosis and received follow-up care in the past year (N = 623) provided information about the presence of bothersome symptoms, symptom-related information needs, adequacy of symptom-related care, and their physical and mental HRQOL. Multivariable statistical analyses were conducted to identify correlates of symptom bother, inadequate care, and symptom information needs and to examine the association between symptom bother and HRQOL.ResultsTwenty-eight percent of the 606 respondents experienced symptom bother in the past year (46 % of leukemia, 24 % of bladder, and 26 % of colorectal cancer survivors). Younger survivors, those of Hispanic ethnicity, with low income, those with recurrent cancer, and chemotherapy recipients were more likely to report symptom bother (all p < 0.05). Symptom bother was associated with lower physical and mental HRQOL (p < 0.001). While 92 % of survivors with symptoms discussed them with their follow-up care physician, 52 % of these reported receiving inadequate symptom care. Survivors reporting inadequate symptom care were 2.5 times as likely to identify symptom information needs compared to those who received adequate care (p < 0.05).ConclusionsOne in four cancer survivors report symptoms 2-5 years post-diagnosis, and only half of these survivors receive adequate care to address those symptoms. Research that refines and tests symptom care interventions for this population is warranted.
| S-EPMC4560245 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveEvidence suggests benefits of long-term follow-up care attendance for childhood cancer survivors, but studies show poor inclusion of survivorship issues and needs. While information needs of childhood cancer survivors have been addressed previously, few studies specifically investigated the supportive care needs of survivors beyond the domain of information and communication. Therefore, this qualitative study aimed to assess the unmet needs of childhood cancer survivors with regards to their long-term survivorship.MethodsChildhood Cancer Switzerland invited survivors of childhood cancer to participate in our study. We used semistructured interviews to assess survivors' experiences regarding the impact of their disease and the (un)met needs during their survivorship. Data analysis followed the principles of qualitative content analysis.ResultsInterviews were conducted with 28 childhood cancer survivors (mean age 31 years, age at diagnosis 9 years, time since end of treatment 19 years). Key themes in relation to unmet needs of survivors were (1) lacking psychosocial support, (2) lacking collaboration and decentralization of care, (3) starting from zero, and (4) need for centralized, specialized, and individualized services.ConclusionsOur findings revealed a demand for integrating psychosocial support in long-term follow-up care and a strong need for personalized, centralized, and interdisciplinary long-term follow-up care. Current established interdisciplinary clinics should be further extended to provide centralized, personalized, and evidence-based long-term follow-up care including adequate psychosocial support for all childhood cancer survivors.
| S-EPMC8048447 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We examined correlates of low engagement in the healthcare system, experiences with survivorship care, barriers to follow-up care, and potential resources for promoting follow-up care among young adult survivors of childhood cancers. We conducted a mixed-method study involving surveys of 106 survivors of childhood cancer aged 18-34 recruited from a university-affiliated children's hospital and an NCI-designated cancer center in the Southeastern USA. Phone-based semistructured interviews were then conducted in a subset of 26. Assessments included health factors, psychosocial factors, healthcare system interaction, and interest in resources to promote engagement in healthcare. Survey participants were on average 22.14?(SD?=?3.16) years old, 50.0 % female, and 77.4 % White. Overall, 46.0 % had attended survivorship clinic, 47.2 % reported receiving a treatment summary, 68.9 % had a primary care provider, and 17.0 % reported no interaction with healthcare in the past 2 years. Correlates of less than annual healthcare provider visits included being older (p?=?0.003), being male (p?<?0.001), lack of insurance (p?=?0.002), and having had chemotherapy (p?=?0.05). Participants reported varied experiences in terms of how health and treatment information was presented, from none or too little to overwhelming or anxiety-provoking amounts. Barriers to engaging in survivorship care included no/limited insurance, time, or transportation; major life changes; anxiety; and difficulty transitioning from pediatrics to adult care. Participants highlighted the need for educational and psychosocial resources, particularly technology-based resources. Multilevel interventions are needed to increase engagement in survivorship care among young adult cancer survivors. Technology-based resources addressing social support and mental well-being are intervention possibilities.
| S-EPMC4712118 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine healthcare utilisation and adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) follow-up guidelines.MethodsA total of 2450 out of 3025 stage I-III CRC survivors diagnosed between 2000 and 2009 completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, SF-12, EORTC QLQ-CR38 and Fatigue Assessment Score questionnaires, in December 2010. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to identify predictors for increased follow-up care (>1 visit than recommended by guidelines).ResultsIn the first follow-up year, the average number of cancer-related visits to the general practitioner and medical specialist was 1.7 and 4.2, respectively. More than 80% of the CRC survivors was comfortable with their follow-up schedule, and 49-72% of them received follow-up according to the guidelines. Around 29-47% was followed more than recommended. Simultaneously, around 4-14% of the CRC survivors received less follow-up care than recommended. Survivors of stage III disease treated with chemotherapy received the most follow-up care. In addition, lower socio-economic status stoma and fatigue were associated with increased follow-up care.ConclusionCRC survivors were predominantly followed according to national guidelines. Increased follow-up care is driven by advanced disease stage, chemotherapy, SES, stoma and fatigue. Future studies should investigate how increased follow-up care use can be reduced, while still addressing patients' needs.
| S-EPMC8518769 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSCORE is the first randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine shared oncologist and general practitioner (GP) follow-up for survivors of colorectal cancer (CRC). SCORE aimed to show that shared care (SC) was non-inferior to usual care (UC) on the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHQ-QoL) scale to 12 months.MethodsThe study recruited patients from five public hospitals in Melbourne, Australia between February 2017 and May 2021. Patients post curative intent treatment for stage I-III CRC underwent 1:1 randomisation to SC and UC. SC replaced two oncologist visits with GP visits and included a survivorship care plan and primary care management guidelines. Assessments were at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Difference between groups on GHQ-QoL to 12 months was estimated from a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), with a non-inferiority margin (NIM) of -10 points. Secondary endpoints included quality of life (QoL); patient perceptions of care; costs and clinical care processes (CEA tests, recurrences). Registration ACTRN12617000004369p.Findings150 consenting patients were randomised to SC (N = 74) or UC (N = 76); 11 GPs declined. The mean (SD) GHQ-QoL scores at 12 months were 72 (20.2) for SC versus 73 (17.2) for UC. The MMRM mean estimate of GHQ-QoL across the 6 month and 12 month follow-up was 69 for SC and 73 for UC, mean difference -4.0 (95% CI: -9.0 to 0.9). The lower limit of the 95% CI did not cross the NIM. There was no clear evidence of differences on other QoL, unmet needs or satisfaction scales. At 12 months, the majority preferred SC (40/63; 63%) in the SC group, with equal preference for SC (22/62; 35%) and specialist care (22/62; 35%) in UC group. CEA completion was higher in SC. Recurrences similar between arms. Patients in SC on average incurred USD314 less in health costs versus UC patients.InterpretationSC seems to be an appropriate and cost-effective model of follow-up for CRC survivors.FundingVictorian Cancer Agency and Cancer Australia.
| S-EPMC10716007 | biostudies-literature