J Y Y Kwan1,2, J Croke1,2, T Panzarella3, K Ubhi4, A Fyles1,2, A Koch1,2, R Dinniwell1,2, W Levin1,2, D McCready5, C Chung1,2, F Liu1,2, J L Bender4,6. 1. Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON. 3. Departments of Oncology and Biostatistics, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, ON. 4. ellicsr Health, Wellness and Cancer Survivorship Centre, Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON. 5. Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, ON. 6. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.
Abstract
Background: Improved treatments resulting in a rising number of survivors of breast cancer (bca) calls for optimization of current specialist-based follow-up care. In the present study, we evaluated well survivors of bca with respect to their supportive care needs and attitudes toward follow-up with various care providers, in varying settings, or mediated by technology (for example, videoconference or e-mail). Methods: A cross-sectional paper survey of well survivors of early-stage pT1-2N0 bca undergoing posttreatment follow-up was completed. Descriptive and univariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine associations between survivor characteristics, supportive care needs, and perceived satisfaction with follow-up options. Qualitative responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Results: The 190 well survivors of bca who participated (79% response rate) had an average age of 63 ± 10 years. Median time since first follow-up was 21 months. Most had high perceived satisfaction with in-person specialist care (96%, 177 of 185). The second most accepted model was shared care involving specialist and primary care provider follow-up (54%, 102 of 190). Other models received less than 50% perceived satisfaction. Factors associated with higher perceived satisfaction with non-specialist care or virtual follow-up by a specialist included less formal education (p < 0.01) and more met supportive care needs (p < 0.05). Concerns with virtual follow-up included the perceived impersonal nature of virtual care, potential for inadequate care, and confidentiality. Conclusions: Well survivors of bca want specialists involved in their follow-up care. Compared with virtual follow-up, in-person follow-up is perceived as more reassuring. Certain survivor characteristics (for example, met supportive care needs) might signal survivor readiness for virtual or non-specialist follow-up. Future work should examine multi-stakeholder perspectives about barriers to and facilitators of shared multimodal follow-up care.
Background: Improved treatments resulting in a rising number of survivors of breast cancer (bca) calls for optimization of current specialist-based follow-up care. In the present study, we evaluated well survivors of bca with respect to their supportive care needs and attitudes toward follow-up with various care providers, in varying settings, or mediated by technology (for example, videoconference or e-mail). Methods: A cross-sectional paper survey of well survivors of early-stage pT1-2N0 bca undergoing posttreatment follow-up was completed. Descriptive and univariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine associations between survivor characteristics, supportive care needs, and perceived satisfaction with follow-up options. Qualitative responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Results: The 190 well survivors of bca who participated (79% response rate) had an average age of 63 ± 10 years. Median time since first follow-up was 21 months. Most had high perceived satisfaction with in-person specialist care (96%, 177 of 185). The second most accepted model was shared care involving specialist and primary care provider follow-up (54%, 102 of 190). Other models received less than 50% perceived satisfaction. Factors associated with higher perceived satisfaction with non-specialist care or virtual follow-up by a specialist included less formal education (p < 0.01) and more met supportive care needs (p < 0.05). Concerns with virtual follow-up included the perceived impersonal nature of virtual care, potential for inadequate care, and confidentiality. Conclusions: Well survivors of bca want specialists involved in their follow-up care. Compared with virtual follow-up, in-person follow-up is perceived as more reassuring. Certain survivor characteristics (for example, met supportive care needs) might signal survivor readiness for virtual or non-specialist follow-up. Future work should examine multi-stakeholder perspectives about barriers to and facilitators of shared multimodal follow-up care.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; follow-up; preferences; supportive care needs; survivorship; virtual care
Authors: E Senkus; S Kyriakides; S Ohno; F Penault-Llorca; P Poortmans; E Rutgers; S Zackrisson; F Cardoso Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Ruth A Lewis; Richard D Neal; Maggie Hendry; Barbara France; Nefyn H Williams; Daphne Russell; Dyfrig A Hughes; Ian Russell; Nicholas S A Stuart; David Weller; Clare Wilkinson Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Meredith Giuliani; Maurene McQuestion; Jennifer Jones; Janet Papadakos; Lisa W Le; Nour Alkazaz; Terry Cheng; John Waldron; Pamela Catton; Jolie Ringash Journal: Head Neck Date: 2016-02-19 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: David A Scott; Moyra Mills; Amanda Black; Marie Cantwell; Anna Campbell; Chris R Cardwell; Sam Porter; Michael Donnelly Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2013-03-28
Authors: Zobaida Edib; Verasingam Kumarasamy; Norlia Binti Abdullah; A M Rizal; Sami Abdo Radman Al-Dubai Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Jacqueline L Bender; David Wiljer; Anna M Sawka; Richard Tsang; Nour Alkazaz; James D Brierley Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: Quynh Pham; Jason Hearn; Jacqueline L Bender; Alejando Berlin; Ian Brown; Denise Bryant-Lukosius; Andrew H Feifer; Antonio Finelli; Geoffrey Gotto; Robert Hamilton; Ricardo Rendon; Joseph A Cafazzo Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-04-21 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Denalee M O'Malley; Stacy N Davis; Rahwana Amare; Bianca Sanabria; Brittany Sullivan; Katie A Devine; Jeanne M Ferrante; Patricia A Findley; Suzanne M Miller; Shawna V Hudson Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2020-10-07 Impact factor: 1.771
Authors: Morhaf Al Achkar; Lucille Marchand; Matthew Thompson; Laura Q M Chow; Debra Revere; Laura-Mae Baldwin Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-03-23 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Quynh Pham; Jason Hearn; Bruce Gao; Ian Brown; Robert J Hamilton; Alejandro Berlin; Joseph A Cafazzo; Andrew Feifer Journal: NPJ Digit Med Date: 2020-09-02