Comparing hospital and telephone follow-up after treatment for breast cancer: randomised equivalence trial

Objective To compare traditional hospital follow-up with telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Design A two centre randomised equivalence trial in which women remained in the study for a mean of 24 months. Setting Outpatient clinics in two NHS hospital trusts in the north west of England Participants 374 women treated for breast cancer who were at low to moderate risk of recurrence. Interventions Participants were randomised to traditional hospital follow-up (consultation, clinical examination, and mammography as per hospital policy) or telephone follow-up by specialist nurses (consultation with structured intervention and mammography according to hospital policy). Main outcome measures Psychological morbidity (state-trait anxiety inventory, general health questionnaire (GHQ-12)), participants’ needs for information, participants’ satisfaction, clinical investigations ordered, and time to detection of recurrent disease. Results The 95% confidence interval for difference in mean state-trait scores adjusted for treatment received (−3.33 to 2.07) was within the predefined equivalence region (−3.5 to 3.5). The women in the telephone group were no more anxious as a result of foregoing clinic examinations and face-to-face consultations and reported higher levels of satisfaction than those attending hospital clinics (intention to treat P<0.001). The numbers of clinical investigations ordered did not differ between groups. Recurrences were few (4.5%), with no differences between groups for time to detection (median 60.5 (range 37-131) days in hospital group v 39.0 (10-152) days in telephone group; P=0.228). Conclusions Telephone follow-up was well received by participants, with no physical or psychological disadvantage. It is suitable for women at low to moderate risk of recurrence and those with long travelling distances or mobility problems and decreases the burden on busy hospital clinics

4150 Is telephone follow-up by specialist nurses a cost effective approach?

Background: This paper will report on the findings from an economic evaluation of traditional hospital follow-up versus telephone follow-up by specialist breast care nurses for patients treated for breast cancer in the United Kingdom (UK). Materials and Methods: We conducted a cost minimisation analysis from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective using data from a randomised controlled trial that demonstrated equivalence between hospital and telephone follow-up in terms of psychological morbidity; 374 participants at low-moderate risk of recurrence were recruited to the study. The study was carried out at two hospitals in the North West of Engalnd. In a primary analysis we compared NHS resource use for routine follow-up (i.e. consultations, investigations and referrals) during a mean follow-up period of 24 months. Secondary analyses included patient and carer travel and productivity costs incurred and the NHS and personal social services costs of care in the minority of patients who developed a recurrence of their breast cancer. Results: Participants in the telephone follow-up group had approximately 20% extra consultations (634 versus 524). Telephone consultations were of longer duration and conducted by senior nurses whereas hospital clinic appointments were of shorter duration and often conducted by junior medical staff; this resulted in higher routine follow-up costs in the telephone follow-up group (mean difference £55, 95% bCI £29-£77). There were no significant differences in the costs of treating recurrence between groups. Participants receiving hospital follow-up had significantly higher travel and productivity costs (mean difference £47; 95% bCI £40-£55). Conclusions: Telephone follow-up by specialist nurses may be a useful strategy for reducing the burden on busy hospital clinics and providing a quality service. Although patients and carers will have fewer costs with telephone follow-up, this approach will not necessarily lead to cost or salary savings for the health service