Literature DB >> 10423068

Influence of follow-up on health-related quality of life after radical surgery for colorectal cancer.

B J Kjeldsen1, H Thorsen, D Whalley, O Kronborg.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The possible benefit for patients of follow-up examinations after curative surgery for colorectal cancer is at present not proven. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of follow-up examinations on health-related quality of life and to assess the attitude of the patients to check-ups.
METHODS: A total of 350 patients who had had curative surgery for colorectal cancer and who had been subsequently randomized to either frequent follow-up or virtually no follow-up completed the Nottingham Health Profile and a second questionnaire assessing their attitude to the follow-up visits.
RESULTS: The patients who were receiving more frequent follow-up had greater confidence in the check-ups, but the improvement in the health-related quality of life was only marginally better than that of those receiving few follow-up visits.
CONCLUSION: The relatively small benefit for health-related quality of life does not justify expensive frequent routine examinations after surgery for colorectal cancer. The Nottingham Health Profile proved to be a reliable instrument within this patient group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10423068     DOI: 10.1080/003655299750026254

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0036-5521            Impact factor:   2.423


  23 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review of patient perspectives on surveillance after colorectal cancer treatment.

Authors:  Julia R Berian; Amanda Cuddy; Amanda B Francescatti; Linda O'Dwyer; Y Nancy You; Robert J Volk; George J Chang
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 4.442

2.  Surveillance after curative resection of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Adena Scheer; Rebecca Ann C Auer
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2009-11

Review 3.  Surveillance of patients following surgery with curative intent for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Steven Gan; Katherine Wilson; Paul Hollington
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-07-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 4.  Follow-up of cancer in primary care versus secondary care: systematic review.

Authors:  Ruth A Lewis; Richard D Neal; Nefyn H Williams; Barbara France; Maggie Hendry; Daphne Russell; Dyfrig A Hughes; Ian Russell; Nicholas S A Stuart; David Weller; Clare Wilkinson
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Adherence to surveillance care guidelines after breast and colorectal cancer treatment with curative intent.

Authors:  Ramzi G Salloum; Mark C Hornbrook; Paul A Fishman; Debra P Ritzwoller; Maureen C O'Keeffe Rossetti; Jennifer Elston Lafata
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-03-20       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 6.  Follow-up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Mark Jeffery; Brigid E Hickey; Phil N Hider; Adrienne M See
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-11-24

Review 7.  Colorectal cancer surveillance: what's new and what's next.

Authors:  Johnie Rose; Knut Magne Augestad; Gregory S Cooper
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Systematic follow-up after curative surgery for colorectal cancer in Norway: a population-based audit of effectiveness, costs, and compliance.

Authors:  Hartwig Körner; Kjetil Söreide; Pål J Stokkeland; Jon Arne Söreide
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  Follow-up recommendations for colon cancer.

Authors:  W Donald Buie; Jo-Anne P Attard
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2005-08

10.  Cost effectiveness analysis of intensive versus conventional follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Andrew G Renehan; Sarah T O'Dwyer; David K Whynes
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-01-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.