PURPOSE: Little is known about the current role of the general practitioner (GP) in breast cancer follow-up care. This study explores primary healthcare use in the period after completion of primary breast cancer treatment. METHODS: A total of 336 women with a history of early-stage breast cancer treated with curative intent were identified in the primary care database of the Registration Network Groningen (RNG) (1998-2007) and matched with a reference population of 983 women without breast cancer on birth year and GP. RESULTS: Over the entire follow-up period (starting 1 year post-diagnosis), the median numbers of face-to-face contacts, drug prescriptions, and referrals in the patient group were significantly higher than those in the reference group: 4.0 vs. 3.2/year, 12.3 vs. 8.4/year, and 0.4 vs. 0.3/year, Mann-Whitney (M-W) test p < 0.001 for all differences. At least one annual face-to-face contact was observed for 96.7 % of patients and 92.9 % of women from the reference population (Chi-square test p = 0.011). More patients than women from the reference population had face-to-face contacts for reasons related to breast cancer or were prescribed hormone antagonists and aromatase inhibitors to treat breast cancer. The main predictor of higher rates of face-to-face contacts and drug prescriptions was a higher age at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows increased primary healthcare utilisation among women with a history of breast cancer, especially among the elderly. When follow-up is transferred to the primary care setting, new responsibilities of GPs might be incorporated into existing primary healthcare delivery.
PURPOSE: Little is known about the current role of the general practitioner (GP) in breast cancer follow-up care. This study explores primary healthcare use in the period after completion of primary breast cancer treatment. METHODS: A total of 336 women with a history of early-stage breast cancer treated with curative intent were identified in the primary care database of the Registration Network Groningen (RNG) (1998-2007) and matched with a reference population of 983 women without breast cancer on birth year and GP. RESULTS: Over the entire follow-up period (starting 1 year post-diagnosis), the median numbers of face-to-face contacts, drug prescriptions, and referrals in the patient group were significantly higher than those in the reference group: 4.0 vs. 3.2/year, 12.3 vs. 8.4/year, and 0.4 vs. 0.3/year, Mann-Whitney (M-W) test p < 0.001 for all differences. At least one annual face-to-face contact was observed for 96.7 % of patients and 92.9 % of women from the reference population (Chi-square test p = 0.011). More patients than women from the reference population had face-to-face contacts for reasons related to breast cancer or were prescribed hormone antagonists and aromatase inhibitors to treat breast cancer. The main predictor of higher rates of face-to-face contacts and drug prescriptions was a higher age at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows increased primary healthcare utilisation among women with a history of breast cancer, especially among the elderly. When follow-up is transferred to the primary care setting, new responsibilities of GPs might be incorporated into existing primary healthcare delivery.
Authors: Merel L Kimman; Benedict G C Dellaert; Liesbeth J Boersma; Philippe Lambin; Carmen D Dirksen Journal: Acta Oncol Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.089
Authors: L V van de Poll-Franse; F Mols; A J J M Vingerhoets; A C Voogd; R M H Roumen; J W W Coebergh Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2006-01-10 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: A Rosemary Tate; Alexander G R Martin; Tarita Murray-Thomas; Sarah R Anderson; Jackie A Cassell Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2009-06-23 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Carriene Roorda; Geertruida H de Bock; Willem Jan van der Veen; Annemarie Lindeman; Liesbeth Jansen; Klaas van der Meer Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2011-03-25 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Jennifer M Jones; Karin Olson; Pamela Catton; Charles N Catton; Neil E Fleshner; Monika K Krzyzanowska; David R McCready; Rebecca K S Wong; Haiyan Jiang; Doris Howell Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Rachel Meadows; Timethia Bonner; Megha Dobhal; Sujana Borra; Jordan A Killion; Raheem Paxton Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-10-05 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Mario Ulises Pérez-Zepeda; Eduardo Cárdenas-Cárdenas; Matteo Cesari; Ana Patricia Navarrete-Reyes; Luis Miguel Gutiérrez-Robledo Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2016-02-08 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Judith A Meiklejohn; Alexander Mimery; Jennifer H Martin; Ross Bailie; Gail Garvey; Euan T Walpole; Jon Adams; Daniel Williamson; Patricia C Valery Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Daan Brandenbarg; Saskia W M C Maass; Olaf P Geerse; Mariken E Stegmann; Charlotte Handberg; Maya J Schroevers; Saskia F A Duijts Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2019-05-14 Impact factor: 2.328
Authors: Deborah N Lo-Fo-Wong; Hanneke C de Haes; Neil K Aaronson; Doris L van Abbema; Jolien M Admiraal; Mathilda D den Boer; Marjan van Hezewijk; Marcelle Immink; Ad A Kaptein; Marian B Menke-Pluijmers; Nicola S Russell; Manon Schriek; Sieta Sijtsema; Geertjan van Tienhoven; Mirjam A Sprangers Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2020-02-19 Impact factor: 2.267