OBJECTIVE: To investigate general practitioner (GP) assessment of a structured oncology information pack sent to GPs when newly referred patients had visited a department of oncology for the first time, and to compare their assessment of this material with their assessment of traditional information provided by the department. DESIGN: Randomised, unblinded clinical trial. SETTING: Patients and GPs in the catchment area of a regional oncology department. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: 248 cancer patients and their 199 GPs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: GP assessment of the quality of the information material received for each patient. RESULTS: 88.3% of the 248 questionnaires were returned. The structured information pack improved GP knowledge of oncology; GPs found themselves better equipped to support and counsel patients during the course of their illness, and practitioner satisfaction with the department rose. CONCLUSION: Intervention, though reasonably simple, inexpensive and not particularly time-consuming, improved cooperation between the specialist department and the GP. While this is a small step in the right direction, the need remains for new initiatives and further studies into how to improve cooperation and communication between the primary and secondary healthcare sectors.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To investigate general practitioner (GP) assessment of a structured oncology information pack sent to GPs when newly referred patients had visited a department of oncology for the first time, and to compare their assessment of this material with their assessment of traditional information provided by the department. DESIGN: Randomised, unblinded clinical trial. SETTING:Patients and GPs in the catchment area of a regional oncology department. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: 248 cancerpatients and their 199 GPs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: GP assessment of the quality of the information material received for each patient. RESULTS: 88.3% of the 248 questionnaires were returned. The structured information pack improved GP knowledge of oncology; GPs found themselves better equipped to support and counsel patients during the course of their illness, and practitioner satisfaction with the department rose. CONCLUSION: Intervention, though reasonably simple, inexpensive and not particularly time-consuming, improved cooperation between the specialist department and the GP. While this is a small step in the right direction, the need remains for new initiatives and further studies into how to improve cooperation and communication between the primary and secondary healthcare sectors.
Authors: Marie-Eve Rouge-Bugat; Donia Lassoued; Joy Bacrie; Nathalie Boussier; Jean-Pierre Delord; Stéphane Oustric; Eric Bauvin; Maryse Lapeyre-Mestre; François Bertucci; Pascale Grosclaude Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-03-27 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Laura-Mae Baldwin; Sharon A Dobie; Yong Cai; Barry G Saver; Pamela K Green; C Y Wang Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2011 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Lindsay Blank; Susan Baxter; Helen Buckley Woods; Elizabeth Goyder; Andrew Lee; Nick Payne; Melanie Rimmer Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Ietje A A Perfors; Anne M May; Josi A Boeijen; Niek J de Wit; Elsken van der Wall; Charles W Helsper Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-04-14 Impact factor: 2.692