Judith A Meiklejohn1, Alexander Mimery2, Jennifer H Martin3,4, Ross Bailie5, Gail Garvey6, Euan T Walpole7,8,9, Jon Adams10, Daniel Williamson11, Patricia C Valery12,13. 1. QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Judith.meiklejohn@qimrberghofer.edu.au. 2. Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 3. University of Newcastle School of Medicine and Public Health, Callaghan, NSW, Australia. 4. Southside Clinical School, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 5. National Centre for Quality Improvement in Indigenous Primary Health Care, Menzies School of Health Research, Brisbane, Australia. 6. Epidemiology and Health Systems, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT, Australia. 7. Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 8. Metro South Health Hospital and Health Service, Woolloongabba, Australia. 9. University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 10. Faculty of Health, University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 11. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Unit, Queensland Health, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 12. QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 13. Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study is to explore the role of the general practitioners, family physicians and primary care physicians (GP) in the provision of follow-up cancer care. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE and CINAHL were systematically searched for primary research focussing on the role of the GP from the perspective of GPs and patients. Data were extracted using a standardised form and synthesised using a qualitative descriptive approach. RESULTS: The initial search generated 6487 articles: 25 quantitative and 33 qualitative articles were included. Articles focused on patients' and GPs' perspectives of the GP role in follow-up cancer care. Some studies reported on the current role of the GP, barriers and enablers to GP involvement from the perspective of the GP and suggestions for future GP roles. Variations in guidelines and practice of follow-up cancer care in the primary health care sector exist. However, GPs and patients across the included studies supported a greater GP role in follow-up cancer care. This included greater support for care coordination, screening, diagnosis and management of physical and psychological effects of cancer and its treatment, symptom and pain relief, health promotion, palliative care and continuing normal general health care provision. CONCLUSION: While there are variations in guidelines and practice of follow-up cancer care in the primary health care sector, GPs and patients across the reviewed studies supported a greater role by the GP. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Greater GP role in cancer care could improve the quality of patient care for cancer survivors. Better communication between the tertiary sector and GP across the cancer phases would enable clear delineation of roles.
PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study is to explore the role of the general practitioners, family physicians and primary care physicians (GP) in the provision of follow-up cancer care. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE and CINAHL were systematically searched for primary research focussing on the role of the GP from the perspective of GPs and patients. Data were extracted using a standardised form and synthesised using a qualitative descriptive approach. RESULTS: The initial search generated 6487 articles: 25 quantitative and 33 qualitative articles were included. Articles focused on patients' and GPs' perspectives of the GP role in follow-up cancer care. Some studies reported on the current role of the GP, barriers and enablers to GP involvement from the perspective of the GP and suggestions for future GP roles. Variations in guidelines and practice of follow-up cancer care in the primary health care sector exist. However, GPs and patients across the included studies supported a greater GP role in follow-up cancer care. This included greater support for care coordination, screening, diagnosis and management of physical and psychological effects of cancer and its treatment, symptom and pain relief, health promotion, palliative care and continuing normal general health care provision. CONCLUSION: While there are variations in guidelines and practice of follow-up cancer care in the primary health care sector, GPs and patients across the reviewed studies supported a greater role by the GP. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Greater GP role in cancer care could improve the quality of patient care for cancer survivors. Better communication between the tertiary sector and GP across the cancer phases would enable clear delineation of roles.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer; Follow-up; General practitioner; Primary health; Role
Authors: D Howell; T F Hack; T K Oliver; T Chulak; S Mayo; M Aubin; M Chasen; C C Earle; A J Friedman; E Green; G W Jones; J M Jones; M Parkinson; N Payeur; C M Sabiston; S Sinclair Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2012-07-10 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Rosaleen O'Brien; Peter W Rose; Christine Campbell; David Weller; Richard D Neal; Clare Wilkinson; Eila K Watson Journal: BJU Int Date: 2010-03-09 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Eila K Watson; Rosaleen O'Brien; Christine Campbell; David Weller; Richard D Neal; Clare Wilkinson; Peter W Rose Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2011-06-21 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Carrie N Klabunde; Paul K J Han; Craig C Earle; Tenbroeck Smith; John Z Ayanian; Richard Lee; Anita Ambs; Julia H Rowland; Arnold L Potosky Journal: Fam Med Date: 2013 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.756
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: J A Meiklejohn; G Garvey; R Bailie; E Walpole; J Adams; D Williamson; J Martin; C M Bernardes; B Arley; B Marcusson; P C Valery Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 3.603