D Brandenbarg1, A J Berendsen1, G H de Bock2. 1. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of General Practice, P.O. Box 196, 9700 AD Groningen, The Netherlands. 2. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Epidemiology, P.O. Box 30001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands. Electronic address: g.h.de.bock@umcg.nl.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Most survivors of cancer enter a follow-up routine after their treatment, the aim of which is to detect recurrence, provide psychological support, monitor treatment-related side-effects, and to evaluate care. Due to rising numbers of people with cancer and better survival of these patients, current follow-up routines are under pressure. We reviewed the literature on patients' expectations and preferences regarding this care. METHODS: We systematically searched the databases of Pubmed, CINAHL, and PsychInfo. Studies were screened and data extraction was double performed by three authors. Data were collected from quantitative and qualitative studies and described thematically. RESULTS: After screening, 12 full-text articles were included, comprising 849 patients aged from 28 to 90 years. Patients expect follow-up visits to detect recurrence of cancer. They want to undergo extensive testing to get reassurance. Furthermore, patients expect relevant information to be provided and to get advice about different aspects of their illness. Psychosocial support is also expected. Patients express a desire for consistency of care as well as continuity of care, and prefer long and intensive follow-up. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: After cancer, patients appear to lose confidence in their bodies and fear cancer recurrence after the end of treatment, which may lead to intensive screening wishes. This is not desirable, since care for cancer is already under pressure due to rising numbers of survivors. We have to ensure that follow-up routines are sustainable and effective. Patients should receive good information about the need for follow-up tests. Doctors should be trained to give this information.
INTRODUCTION: Most survivors of cancer enter a follow-up routine after their treatment, the aim of which is to detect recurrence, provide psychological support, monitor treatment-related side-effects, and to evaluate care. Due to rising numbers of people with cancer and better survival of these patients, current follow-up routines are under pressure. We reviewed the literature on patients' expectations and preferences regarding this care. METHODS: We systematically searched the databases of Pubmed, CINAHL, and PsychInfo. Studies were screened and data extraction was double performed by three authors. Data were collected from quantitative and qualitative studies and described thematically. RESULTS: After screening, 12 full-text articles were included, comprising 849 patients aged from 28 to 90 years. Patients expect follow-up visits to detect recurrence of cancer. They want to undergo extensive testing to get reassurance. Furthermore, patients expect relevant information to be provided and to get advice about different aspects of their illness. Psychosocial support is also expected. Patients express a desire for consistency of care as well as continuity of care, and prefer long and intensive follow-up. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: After cancer, patients appear to lose confidence in their bodies and fear cancer recurrence after the end of treatment, which may lead to intensive screening wishes. This is not desirable, since care for cancer is already under pressure due to rising numbers of survivors. We have to ensure that follow-up routines are sustainable and effective. Patients should receive good information about the need for follow-up tests. Doctors should be trained to give this information.
Authors: Andrea Chirico; Deborah Vizza; Moira Valente; Melania Lo Iacono; Maria Rosita Campagna; Tommaso Palombi; Fabio Alivernini; Fabio Lucidi; Francesco Bruno Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-11-30 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Jet W Ankersmid; Jolanda C van Hoeve; Luc J A Strobbe; Yvonne E A van Riet; Cornelia F van Uden-Kraan; Sabine Siesling; Constance H C Drossaert Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2021-08-27 Impact factor: 2.328
Authors: Linda Aagaard Rasmussen; Henry Jensen; Line Flytkjær Virgilsen; Alina Zalounina Falborg; Henrik Møller; Peter Vedsted Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-12-05 Impact factor: 2.655