BACKGROUND: The multidisciplinary and sequential nature of cancer care makes continuity of care for patients difficult. Cancer patients have often known their general practitioners (GPs) for years and are often in constant contact with them. Objective(s). We examined German GPs' views on their involvement in the care of cancer patients. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 30 German GPs. Purposeful sampling was applied to secure maximum heterogeneity. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and then analyzed using qualitative content analysis according to Mayring. RESULTS: GPs perceive a clear involvement in the latter phase of cancer care but a mainly sporadic role (as and when required) in earlier phases. They think that greater care contributions from GPs are generally beneficial to cancer patients, as their ability to take the patient's history, surroundings and co-morbidities into account enables them to provide more patient-centred care. GPs want to stay involved and to know how their cancer patients are progressing, and they complain about slow or non-existent information sharing between providers, as well as insufficient care coordination. They pro-actively try to overcome these obstacles through direct contact with patients and physicians, and by building networks of trusted care providers. CONCLUSIONS: Given their long-lasting and close relationships with cancer patients, GPs are in a position to accompany them throughout the whole process of cancer care. However, such general involvement is as yet uncommon. Shared care models may have the potential to take into account the complementary character of primary and specialist care.
BACKGROUND: The multidisciplinary and sequential nature of cancer care makes continuity of care for patients difficult. Cancerpatients have often known their general practitioners (GPs) for years and are often in constant contact with them. Objective(s). We examined German GPs' views on their involvement in the care of cancerpatients. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 30 German GPs. Purposeful sampling was applied to secure maximum heterogeneity. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and then analyzed using qualitative content analysis according to Mayring. RESULTS: GPs perceive a clear involvement in the latter phase of cancer care but a mainly sporadic role (as and when required) in earlier phases. They think that greater care contributions from GPs are generally beneficial to cancerpatients, as their ability to take the patient's history, surroundings and co-morbidities into account enables them to provide more patient-centred care. GPs want to stay involved and to know how their cancerpatients are progressing, and they complain about slow or non-existent information sharing between providers, as well as insufficient care coordination. They pro-actively try to overcome these obstacles through direct contact with patients and physicians, and by building networks of trusted care providers. CONCLUSIONS: Given their long-lasting and close relationships with cancerpatients, GPs are in a position to accompany them throughout the whole process of cancer care. However, such general involvement is as yet uncommon. Shared care models may have the potential to take into account the complementary character of primary and specialist care.
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: Martina Kamradt; Ines Baudendistel; Gerda Längst; Marion Kiel; Felicitas Eckrich; Eva Winkler; Joachim Szecsenyi; Dominik Ose Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2015-08-26 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Marianne Heins; François Schellevis; Mirjam Schotman; Bart van Bezooijen; Ismene Tchaoussoglou; Mirjam van der Waart; Lilan Veldhuis; Sandra van Dulmen; Gé Donker; Joke Korevaar Journal: BJGP Open Date: 2018-12-12