Systematic review of patients' and healthcare professionals' views on patient-initiated follow-up in treated cancer patients

被引:1
作者
Dretzke, Janine [1 ,4 ]
Lorenc, Ava [2 ]
Adriano, Ada [1 ]
Herd, Clare [1 ]
Mehanna, Hisham [3 ]
Nankivell, Paul [3 ]
Moore, David J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Birmingham, Inst Appl Hlth Res, Birmingham, England
[2] Univ Bristol, Bristol Med Sch, Populat Hlth Sci, Bristol, England
[3] Univ Birmingham, Inst Head & Neck Studies & Educ, Birmingham, England
[4] Univ Birmingham, Inst Appl Hlth Res, Birmingham B15 2TT, England
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
attitude; cancer; patient-initiated follow-up; qualitative research; survey; systematic review; ENDOMETRIAL CANCER; BREAST-CANCER; NECK-CANCER; REPORTED SYMPTOMS; CLINICIAN VIEWS; HEAD; PREFERENCES; EXPECTATIONS; MULTICENTER; RECURRENCE;
D O I
10.1002/cam4.6243
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Current follow-up models in cancer are seen to be unsustainable and inflexible, and there is growing interest in alternative models, such as patient-initiated follow-up (PIFU). It is therefore important to understand whether PIFU is acceptable to patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs).Methods: Standard systematic review methodology aimed at limiting bias was used for study identification (to January 2022), selection and data extraction. Thematic synthesis was undertaken for qualitative data, and survey findings were tabulated and described.Results: Nine qualitative studies and 22 surveys were included, mainly in breast and endometrial cancer. Women treated for breast or endometrial cancer and HCPs were mostly supportive of PIFU. Facilitators for PIFU included convenience, control over own health and avoidance of anxiety-inducing clinic appointments. Barriers included loss of reassurance from scheduled visits and lack of confidence in self-management. HCPs were supportive of PIFU but concerned about resistance to change, unsuitability of PIFU for some patients and costs.Conclusion: PIFU is viewed mostly positively by women treated for breast or endometrial cancer, and by HCPs, but further evidence is needed from a wider range of cancers, men, and more representative samples.A protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020181412).
引用
收藏
页码:16531 / 16547
页数:17
相关论文
共 68 条
[1]  
Al-Gailani M., 2010, EUR J SURG ONCOL, V36, P1119
[2]  
Amercian Cancer Society, CANC SURV
[3]   CLINICIANS' VIEWS ON ENDOMETRIAL CANCER FOLLOW-UP STRATEGIES [J].
Amirthanayagam, A. ;
Jones, E. ;
Moss, E. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2021, 31 :A181-A181
[4]   IMPACT OF COVID 19 ON ENDOMETRIAL CANCER FOLLOW-UP STRATEGIES [J].
Amirthanayagam, A. ;
Boulter, L. ;
Morris, H. ;
Miles, T. ;
Manderville, H. ;
Moss, E. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2021, 31 :A190-A190
[5]   Risk Stratified Follow-Up for Endometrial Cancer: The Clinicians' Perspective [J].
Amirthanayagam, Anumithra ;
Boulter, Louise ;
Millet, Nessa ;
McDermott, Hilary J. ;
Morrison, Jo ;
Taylor, Alexandra ;
Miles, Tracie ;
Coton, Lorna ;
Moss, Esther L. .
CURRENT ONCOLOGY, 2023, 30 (02) :2237-2248
[6]  
[Anonymous], PAT IN FOLL UP NHS E
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2017, EUR J PERS CENTRED H, DOI DOI 10.5750/EJPCH.V5I1.1248
[8]  
[Anonymous], IMPLEMENTING PATIENT
[9]   Follow-up after curative treatment for colorectal cancer: longitudinal evaluation of patient initiated follow-up in the first 12 months [J].
Batehup, L. ;
Porter, K. ;
Gage, H. ;
Williams, P. ;
Simmonds, P. ;
Lowson, E. ;
Dodson, L. ;
Davies, N. J. ;
Wagland, R. ;
Winter, J. D. ;
Richardson, A. ;
Turner, A. ;
Corner, J. L. .
SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2017, 25 (07) :2063-2073
[10]   Comparing hospital and telephone follow-up for patients treated for stage-I endometrial cancer (ENDCAT trial): a randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial [J].
Beaver, K. ;
Williamson, S. ;
Sutton, C. ;
Hollingworth, W. ;
Gardner, A. ;
Allton, B. ;
Abdel-Aty, M. ;
Blackwood, K. ;
Burns, S. ;
Curwen, D. ;
Ghani, R. ;
Keating, P. ;
Murray, S. ;
Tomlinson, A. ;
Walker, B. ;
Willett, M. ;
Wood, N. ;
Martin-Hirsch, P. .
BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2017, 124 (01) :150-160