Kathryn E Weaver1, Noreen M Aziz2, Neeraj K Arora2, Laura P Forsythe2, Ann S Hamilton2, Ingrid Oakley-Girvan2, Gretchen Keel2, Keith M Bellizzi2, Julia H Rowland2. 1. Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC; National Institute of Nursing Research; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, CA; and University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT keweaver@wakehealth.edu. 2. Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC; National Institute of Nursing Research; National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, CA; and University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Post-treatment follow-up represents a crucial aspect of quality cancer care; however, data are lacking regarding follow-up care experiences, perception of provider involvement in care, and perceived quality of care from diverse samples of long-term survivors diagnosed as adults. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed in 2005 to 2006 to breast, prostate, colorectal, endometrial, and ovarian cancer survivors (4 to 14 years after diagnosis), sampled from California SEER cancer registries. RESULTS: Most survivors (n = 1,490) reported recent follow-up care (68.7%), generally from oncology specialists only (47.4%) or shared between oncology and primary care providers (PCPs; 27.6%). Most survivors reported follow-up care advice (79.9%); fewer reported late-effects advice or receipt of a treatment summary (41.7% and 19.9%, respectively). Survivors who identified a PCP as their main follow-up care physician were as likely as those identifying an oncology specialist to rate their care as high quality (odds ratio [OR], 2.56; 95% CI, 0.98 to 6.74); however, survivors who could not identify a main follow-up care provider were less likely to report high-quality care (OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.50). Compared with follow-up care by an oncology specialist only, care by a PCP only was associated with a lower quality-of-care rating (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.91), but there was no significant difference in quality rating by survivors when care was shared by an oncology specialist and PCP compared with an oncology specialist only. CONCLUSION: Long-term survivors commonly report follow-up care years after their diagnosis; however, many patients' follow-up lacks important components. Care is more likely to be rated as high quality when one main provider is identified and an oncology specialist is involved.
INTRODUCTION: Post-treatment follow-up represents a crucial aspect of quality cancer care; however, data are lacking regarding follow-up care experiences, perception of provider involvement in care, and perceived quality of care from diverse samples of long-term survivors diagnosed as adults. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed in 2005 to 2006 to breast, prostate, colorectal, endometrial, and ovarian cancer survivors (4 to 14 years after diagnosis), sampled from California SEER cancer registries. RESULTS: Most survivors (n = 1,490) reported recent follow-up care (68.7%), generally from oncology specialists only (47.4%) or shared between oncology and primary care providers (PCPs; 27.6%). Most survivors reported follow-up care advice (79.9%); fewer reported late-effects advice or receipt of a treatment summary (41.7% and 19.9%, respectively). Survivors who identified a PCP as their main follow-up care physician were as likely as those identifying an oncology specialist to rate their care as high quality (odds ratio [OR], 2.56; 95% CI, 0.98 to 6.74); however, survivors who could not identify a main follow-up care provider were less likely to report high-quality care (OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.50). Compared with follow-up care by an oncology specialist only, care by a PCP only was associated with a lower quality-of-care rating (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.91), but there was no significant difference in quality rating by survivors when care was shared by an oncology specialist and PCP compared with an oncology specialist only. CONCLUSION: Long-term survivors commonly report follow-up care years after their diagnosis; however, many patients' follow-up lacks important components. Care is more likely to be rated as high quality when one main provider is identified and an oncology specialist is involved.
Authors: Erin E Kent; Neeraj K Arora; Julia H Rowland; Keith M Bellizzi; Laura P Forsythe; Ann S Hamilton; Ingrid Oakley-Girvan; Ellen B Beckjord; Noreen M Aziz Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2012-09-28
Authors: Christopher E Desch; Al B Benson; Mark R Somerfield; Patrick J Flynn; Carol Krause; Charles L Loprinzi; Bruce D Minsky; David G Pfister; Katherine S Virgo; Nicholas J Petrelli Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-10-31 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David A Haggstrom; Neeraj K Arora; Paul Helft; Marla L Clayman; Ingrid Oakley-Girvan Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Neeraj K Arora; Ann S Hamilton; Arnold L Potosky; Julia H Rowland; Noreen M Aziz; Keith M Bellizzi; Carrie N Klabunde; Wendy McLaughlin; Jennifer Stevens Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Keith M Bellizzi; Noreen M Aziz; Julia H Rowland; Kathryn Weaver; Neeraj K Arora; Ann S Hamilton; Ingrid Oakley-Girvan; Gretchen Keel Journal: J Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2012-07-25
Authors: Anna Jansana; Margarita Posso; Inmaculada Guerrero; Alexandra Prados-Torres; Maria Isabel Del Cura; Xavier Castells; Maria Sala Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2019-04-09 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Corinne R Leach; Kathryn E Weaver; Noreen M Aziz; Catherine M Alfano; Keith M Bellizzi; Erin E Kent; Laura P Forsythe; Julia H Rowland Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2014-10-16 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Daniel C McFarland; Megan Johnson Shen; Kirk Harris; John Mandeli; Amy Tiersten; Jimmie Holland; Daniel C McFarland; Megan Johnson Shen; Kirk Harris; John Mandeli; Amy Tiersten; Jimmie Holland Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: J L Tucholka; N Jacobson; N M Steffens; J R Schumacher; A J Tevaarwerk; B Anderson; L G Wilke; C C Greenberg; Heather B Neuman Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-01-13 Impact factor: 3.603