1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Follow‐up after breast cancer: Variations, best practices, and opportunities for improvement according to health care professionals

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          Follow‐up after breast cancer can be divided into surveillance and aftercare. It remains unclear how follow‐up can ideally be organised from the perspective of health care professionals (HCPs). The aim of this study was to gain insight in the organisation of follow‐up in seven Dutch teaching hospitals and to identify best practices and opportunities for improvement of breast cancer (all stages) follow‐up as proposed by HCPs.

          Methods

          Semi‐structured in‐depth group interviews were performed, one in each of the participating hospitals, with in total 16 HCPs and 2 patient advocates. To describe the organisation of follow‐up, transcripts were analysed using a deductive approach. Best practices and opportunities were derived using an inductive approach.

          Results

          Variation was found in the organisation of aftercare, especially in timing, frequency, and disciplines of involved HCPs. Less variation was observed for surveillance, which was guided by the national guideline. Best practices focused on case management and adequate collaboration between HCPs of different disciplines. Mentioned opportunities were improving the structured monitoring of patients' needs and a comprehensive guideline for organisation and content of aftercare.

          Conclusions

          Variation in follow‐up existed between hospitals. Shared decision‐making (SDM) about surveillance is desirable to ensure that surveillance matches the patient needs, preferences, and personal risk for recurrences.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          A three-talk model for shared decision making: multistage consultation process

          Objectives To revise an existing three-talk model for learning how to achieve shared decision making, and to consult with relevant stakeholders to update and obtain wider engagement. Design Multistage consultation process. Setting Key informant group, communities of interest, and survey of clinical specialties. Participants 19 key informants, 153 member responses from multiple communities of interest, and 316 responses to an online survey from medically qualified clinicians from six specialties. Results After extended consultation over three iterations, we revised the three-talk model by making changes to one talk category, adding the need to elicit patient goals, providing a clear set of tasks for each talk category, and adding suggested scripts to illustrate each step. A new three-talk model of shared decision making is proposed, based on “team talk,” “option talk,” and “decision talk,” to depict a process of collaboration and deliberation. Team talk places emphasis on the need to provide support to patients when they are made aware of choices, and to elicit their goals as a means of guiding decision making processes. Option talk refers to the task of comparing alternatives, using risk communication principles. Decision talk refers to the task of arriving at decisions that reflect the informed preferences of patients, guided by the experience and expertise of health professionals. Conclusions The revised three-talk model of shared decision making depicts conversational steps, initiated by providing support when introducing options, followed by strategies to compare and discuss trade-offs, before deliberation based on informed preferences.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Rapid screening for psychologic distress in men with prostate carcinoma: a pilot study.

            As more oncology care is moved to the outpatient setting, the need for a rapid means for oncologists to identify patients with significant distress has increased. Concurrent with this move has been the pressure to reduce time spent with each patient, adding to the likelihood that a distressed patient will not be recognized and will remain untreated in the current health care environment. A pilot program was conducted in a prostate carcinoma oncology clinic to test the feasibility of a two-stage approach that identifies patients in significant distress and refers them for treatment. Two pencil and paper self-report measures were used to detect psychologic distress in patients over the previous week: 1) The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and 2) "The Distress Thermometer." Patients who scored above an agreed upon cutoff score on either measure (HADS = 15+; Thermometer = 5+) were referred to the psychiatric liaison in the clinic for evaluation. Compliance in filling out the measures was excellent; only 8 of 121 patients (6.6%) refused. Thirty-one percent of evaluable patients were referred based on elevated scores. Seventeen of 29 patients actually were evaluated. Eight of 17 patients met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (of Mental Disorders)-IV criteria for a psychiatric disorder. This approach for rapid screening for distress was acceptable in prostate carcinoma patients, although these older men were reluctant to agree to evaluation and treatment. This simple screening method needs further testing and the identification of barriers on the part of the patient and oncologist that impede the identification of the most distressed patients.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Improving access to supportive cancer care through an eHealth application: a qualitative needs assessment among cancer survivors.

              To gain insight into cancer survivors' needs towards an eHealth application monitoring quality of life and targeting personalised access to supportive care.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                j.w.ankersmid@utwente.nl
                Journal
                Eur J Cancer Care (Engl)
                Eur J Cancer Care (Engl)
                10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2354
                ECC
                European Journal of Cancer Care
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0961-5423
                1365-2354
                27 August 2021
                November 2021
                : 30
                : 6 , Themed section on Rare Cancers and Cancer of Unknown Primary ( doiID: 10.1111/ecc.v30.6 )
                : e13505
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Center University of Twente Enschede The Netherlands
                [ 2 ] Santeon Hospital Group Utrecht The Netherlands
                [ 3 ] Department of Research and Development Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL) Utrecht The Netherlands
                [ 4 ] Department of Surgery Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital Nijmegen The Netherlands
                [ 5 ] Department of Surgery Catharina Hospital Eindhoven The Netherlands
                [ 6 ] Department of Psychology, Health and Technology University of Twente Enschede The Netherlands
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Jet W. Ankersmid, University of Twente, Hallenweg 5, 7522 NH Enschede, The Netherlands.

                Email: j.w.ankersmid@ 123456utwente.nl

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4562-8147
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3133-6212
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3840-3003
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4465-5768
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3898-416X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0273-824X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7083-3169
                Article
                ECC13505
                10.1111/ecc.13505
                9285965
                34449103
                7b5a1761-c2c3-4b91-a252-1c2f6f4514f3
                © 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Cancer Care published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 02 July 2021
                : 01 March 2021
                : 12 August 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 3, Pages: 9, Words: 6793
                Funding
                Funded by: ZonMW , doi 10.13039/501100001826;
                Award ID: 516007001
                Categories
                Original Article
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                November 2021
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.1.7 mode:remove_FC converted:15.07.2022

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                aftercare,breast cancer,care pathways,follow‐up,personalised care,survivorship care

                Comments

                Comment on this article