Results of a Quantitative Survey to Explore Both Perceptions of the Purposes of Follow-up and Preferences for Methods of Follow-up Delivery Among Service Users, Primary Care Practitioners and Specialist Clinicians after Cancer Treatment

Frew, Gilmour; Smith, Andy; Zutshi, B.; Young, Nancy L.; Aggarwal, Ajay; Jones, Phyllis E.; Kockelbergh, Roger; Richards, Mike; Maher, E.J.

doi:10.1016/j.clon.2010.06.008

Cited by 34 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Respondents could choose from a number of follow-up models, but were not asked if they would reject a particular model. What was evident in the study by Frew et al [34] was specialist follow-up was the most experienced by survivors (84% n=528) and clinicians (95% n=2167). However specialists who had experienced non-specialist models of follow up (60% n=819) preferred this model over all others including specialist-led (87%).…”

Section: Physician-ledmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…The included physician-led studies (n=4) presented comparisons of self-reported practices in survivorship follow-up [8] and clinician perceptions of survivorship follow-up [33][34][35]. A qualitative exploratory study by Chubak et al [33] reported the views of clinicians and administrators (n=40) from 10 integrated cancer centres.…”

Section: Physician-ledmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eight articles described and proposed different models of survivorship care [27,28,1,5,29,30,9,7] (Table 2). An additional six articles reported the use of a range of models of care for haematology cancer survivors: two reported nurse-led studies [31,32] and four referred to physician-led studies [33,8,34,35] (Table 3). The included articles reported views from Australia (n=1), United States of America (USA) (n=10) and United Kingdom (UK) (n=3), shown in Table 3.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Frew et al [34] studied survivor (n=626) and clinican (n=2302) views on different models of care. Respondents could choose from a number of follow-up models, but were not asked if they would reject a particular model.…”

Section: Physician-ledmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Models of survivorship care provision in adult patients with haematological cancer: an integrative literature review

Taylor

Chan

Monterosso

2015

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(2015) Models of survivorship care provision in adult patients with haematological cancer: an integrative literature review. Supportive Care in Cancer, 23(5), 1447-1458. doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-2652-6 The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2652-6 Results: Fourteen articles were included in this review. Eight articles proposed and described models of care and six reported the use of a range of survivorship models of care in haematology cancer survivors. No randomised controlled trials or literature reviews were found to have been undertaken specifically with this cohort of cancer survivors. There was variation in the models described and who provided the survivorship care.Conclusion: Due to the lack of studies evaluating the effectiveness of models of care, it is difficult to determine the best model of care for haematology cancer survivors. Many different models of care are being put into practice before robust research is conducted. Therefore welldesigned high quality pragmatic randomised controlled trials are required to inform clinical practice.

show abstract

Section: Physician-ledmentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Physician-ledmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Physician-ledmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Models of survivorship care provision in adult patients with haematological cancer: an integrative literature review

Taylor

Chan

Monterosso

2015

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a recent survey, nearly half of cancer survivors were unaware of the long term consequences of treatment and of those who were aware many did not know which effects might affect them personally. Awareness among specialists is higher,7 but treatment consequences are not routinely recorded in either primary or secondary care records (indeed, cancer treatment is rarely coded in primary care electronic records in the UK). The group received reports of patients troubled by multiple confusing symptoms, but receiving neither a diagnosis nor help.…”

Section: Making the Invisible Visiblementioning

confidence: 99%

Consequences of cancer treatment: a new challenge for supportive and palliative care

Maher

2012

BMJ Support Palliat Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systematic review of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ views on patient‐initiated follow‐up in treated cancer patients

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCurrent follow‐up models in cancer are seen to be unsustainable and inflexible, and there is growing interest in alternative models, such as patient‐initiated follow‐up (PIFU). It is therefore important to understand whether PIFU is acceptable to patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs).MethodsStandard systematic review methodology aimed at limiting bias was used for study identification (to January 2022), selection and data extraction. Thematic synthesis was undertaken for qualitative data, and survey findings were tabulated and described.ResultsNine qualitative studies and 22 surveys were included, mainly in breast and endometrial cancer. Women treated for breast or endometrial cancer and HCPs were mostly supportive of PIFU. Facilitators for PIFU included convenience, control over own health and avoidance of anxiety‐inducing clinic appointments. Barriers included loss of reassurance from scheduled visits and lack of confidence in self‐management. HCPs were supportive of PIFU but concerned about resistance to change, unsuitability of PIFU for some patients and costs.ConclusionPIFU is viewed mostly positively by women treated for breast or endometrial cancer, and by HCPs, but further evidence is needed from a wider range of cancers, men, and more representative samples.A protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020181412).

show abstract

Results of a Quantitative Survey to Explore Both Perceptions of the Purposes of Follow-up and Preferences for Methods of Follow-up Delivery Among Service Users, Primary Care Practitioners and Specialist Clinicians after Cancer Treatment

Cited by 34 publications

References 11 publications

Models of survivorship care provision in adult patients with haematological cancer: an integrative literature review

Models of survivorship care provision in adult patients with haematological cancer: an integrative literature review

Consequences of cancer treatment: a new challenge for supportive and palliative care

Systematic review of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ views on patient‐initiated follow‐up in treated cancer patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About