Patients' and healthcare professionals' views of cancer follow-up: systematic review

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background Cancer follow-up places a significant burden on hospital outpatient clinics. There are increasing calls to develop alternative models of provision.

Aim To undertake a systematic review of qualitative studies examining patients' and healthcare professionals' views about cancer follow-up.

Design of study Systematic review.

Setting Primary and secondary care.

Method Comprehensive literature searches included: 19 electronic databases, online trial registries, conference proceedings, and bibliographies of included studies. Eligible studies included qualitative studies examining patients' and healthcare professionals' views of cancer follow-up. Studies of patients with any type of cancer, considered free of active disease, or no longer receiving active treatment were included. Findings were synthesised using thematic analysis.

Results Nineteen studies were included; seven were linked to randomised controlled trials. Eight studies examined the views of healthcare professionals (four of which included GPs) and 16 examined the views of patients. Twelve descriptive themes were identified, from which 12 perceived implications for practice were derived. Most themes related to conventional follow-up in secondary care. Some views concerning other models of care were based on participants' ideas, rather than experiences.

Conclusion Patients' main concern is recurrent disease, and they find regular follow-up, expertise of specialists, and quick access to tests reassuring. Information regarding the effectiveness of follow-up is not given to patients who also have unmet information needs, which would help them to cope and be more involved. Continuity of care, unhurried consultations, and psychosocial support are important, but sometimes lacking in secondary care. GPs are thought to be unwilling and to have insufficient time and expertise to conduct follow-up.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)533-540
Number of pages8
JournalBritish Journal of General Practice
Volume59
Issue number564
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2009

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Patients' and healthcare professionals' views of cancer follow-up: systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this