A randomised controlled trial to improve the role of the general practitioner in cancer rehabilitation: effect on patients’ satisfaction with their general practitioners

OBJECTIVE: To test whether a complex intervention facilitating early cancer rehabilitation by involvement of the general practitioner (GP) soon after diagnosis improves patients’ satisfaction with their GPs. DESIGN: A cluster randomised controlled trial. All general practices in Denmark were randomised to an intervention or a control group before the start of the study. Patients included those with cancer who were subsequently allocated to either group based on the randomisation status of their GP. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with cancer treated for incident cancer at the public regional hospital (Vejle Hospital, Denmark) were included between May 2008 and February 2009. A total of 955 patients registered with 323 practices were included, of which 486 patients were allocated to the intervention group and 469 to the control group. INTERVENTION: The intervention included a patient interview assessing the need for rehabilitation, improved information from the hospital to GPs including information on the patients’ current needs along with information about needs of patients with cancer in general. Further, GPs were encouraged to proactively contact the patients and facilitate the patients’ rehabilitation course. OUTCOME MEASURES: 6 months after inclusion of the patient, patient satisfaction with their GP during the last 12 months in five different dimensions of GP care was assessed using the Danish version of the EuroPEP (European Patients Evaluate General Practice Care) questionnaire (DanPEP). 14 months after inclusion, patient satisfaction with the GP regarding the cancer course and GP's satisfaction with own contribution to the patients’ rehabilitation course were assessed using ad hoc questions specifically designed for this study. RESULTS: No overall effect of the intervention was observed. Subgroup analysis of the patients with breast cancer showed statistically significant improvement of satisfaction with the GP in two of the five DanPEP dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: This complex intervention aiming at improving GPs’ services in cancer rehabilitation had no impact on patient satisfaction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, registration ID number NCT0102137

Self-management and adherence to recommended follow-up after gynaecological cancer:Results from the international InCHARGE study

Objective  To assess the relationship between self-management skills and adherence to follow-up guidelines among gynecological cancer survivors in the Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark, and to assess the relationship between adherence to follow-up programs and use of additional healthcare services.  Methods  For this international, multicenter, cross-sectional study, we recruited gynecological cancer survivors 1-5 years after completion of treatment. Information on follow-up visits, use of healthcare resources, self-management (measured by the Health Education Impact Questionnaire), clinical characteristics, and demographics were obtained by validated questionnaires. Participants were categorized as adherent if they attended the number of follow-up visits recommended by national guidelines, non-adherent if they had fewer visits than recommended, or over-users if they had more visits than recommended.  Results  Of 4455 invited survivors, 2428 (55%) returned the questionnaires, and 911 survivors were included in the analyses. Survivors with high self-management most frequently adhered to recommended follow-up. Non-adherent survivors showed lower self-management in the health-directed activity domain (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.32) than adherent survivors. No other associations between self-management and follow-up adherence were revealed. Non-adherent survivors tended to have endometrial cancer, surgical treatment only, be older, and be Danish residents. Over-users reported more follow-up visits and also used additional healthcare services more frequently than adherent survivors.  Conclusion  Low self-management appears to reduce the likelihood of adherence to national guidelines for gynecological cancer follow-up. Focusing on patient education for survivors at risk of low self-management to ensure adherence to recommended follow-up may improve personalization of follow-up

Self-management and adherence to recommended follow-up after gynaecological cancer: Results from the international InCHARGE study

Objective  To assess the relationship between self-management skills and adherence to follow-up guidelines among gynecological cancer survivors in the Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark, and to assess the relationship between adherence to follow-up programs and use of additional healthcare services.  Methods  For this international, multicenter, cross-sectional study, we recruited gynecological cancer survivors 1-5 years after completion of treatment. Information on follow-up visits, use of healthcare resources, self-management (measured by the Health Education Impact Questionnaire), clinical characteristics, and demographics were obtained by validated questionnaires. Participants were categorized as adherent if they attended the number of follow-up visits recommended by national guidelines, non-adherent if they had fewer visits than recommended, or over-users if they had more visits than recommended.  Results  Of 4455 invited survivors, 2428 (55%) returned the questionnaires, and 911 survivors were included in the analyses. Survivors with high self-management most frequently adhered to recommended follow-up. Non-adherent survivors showed lower self-management in the health-directed activity domain (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.32) than adherent survivors. No other associations between self-management and follow-up adherence were revealed. Non-adherent survivors tended to have endometrial cancer, surgical treatment only, be older, and be Danish residents. Over-users reported more follow-up visits and also used additional healthcare services more frequently than adherent survivors.  Conclusion  Low self-management appears to reduce the likelihood of adherence to national guidelines for gynecological cancer follow-up. Focusing on patient education for survivors at risk of low self-management to ensure adherence to recommended follow-up may improve personalization of follow-up