Preferences for Follow-up After Treatment for Lung Cancer

Nursing care services to address unmet supportive care needs among cancer survivors: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The increasing population of cancer survivors poses a significant challenge for healthcare systems globally, necessitating comprehensive post-treatment care to address diverse physical, psychological, and social needs.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to synthesize and critically evaluate the current evidence concerning the unmet needs for nursing services among cancer survivors, spanning various dimensions of survivorship care.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted across major databases, including PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, to identify relevant studies investigating the unmet needs and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) of nursing services led by nurses among cancer survivors. The final search update was conducted in June 2024. Unmet needs dimensions were categorized by the biopsychosocial-spiritual framework.

RESULTS

Of the 9503 records searched, 18 studies were included. This review revealed mixed findings in the domains of unmet needs and interventions aimed at addressing them. While nurse-led interventions showed promise in addressing physical and daily living needs, outcomes related to psychological and emotional needs varied across studies. Additionally, nurse-led interventions were effective in addressing patient-clinician communication and health system/information needs, although statistical significance was not consistently observed. HRQOL assessments using general and cancer-specific measures yielded mixed findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite limitations of the risk of bias of included studies and weak study designs for evaluating nurse-led intervention effects for cancer survivors, the findings highlight the potential of nursing practice to significantly contribute to improving unmet needs of physical, psychological, and social perspectives and ultimately improving their HRQOL. However, the impact on the spiritual needs of nursing care services is limited by the low number of studies.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

By providing comprehensive support and management, nursing practice can enhance post-treatment outcomes and HRQOL for cancer survivors, contributing to more patient-centered and effective care delivery. More rigorous research considering a biopsychosocial-spiritual perspective to help cancer survivors improve HRQOL is needed.

Surveillance of Lung Cancer and Mesothelioma Patients With Noncurative Treatment Intent: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer patients with advanced disease and no active treatment options currently face frequent follow-up visits to outpatient clinics, associated with significant anxiety, time commitment, and costs. Visits also place considerable strain on the health system. Evidence from other cancers and chronic health conditions suggests virtual or remote follow-up can lead to higher patient satisfaction without negatively impacting health outcomes such as survival time.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to identify patient preferences for, and any evidence of relative effectiveness of, different surveillance protocols for patients who have noncurative treatment intent for lung cancer or mesothelioma.

INTERVENTIONS/METHODS

MEDLINE, PubMed, and CINAHL Plus databases were searched for articles published between 1998 and June 2018. The search was restricted to English-language publications and included all original research.

RESULTS

Nine studies met the inclusion criteria, with most studies being retrospective. Findings identified the need for reassurance and hope as part of surveillance, the importance of trust and relationship, and the lack of consistency and evidence around frequency and method of surveillance models.

CONCLUSIONS

Current surveillance is based on expert opinion with little consideration of patient preferences, quality of life, impact on anxiety, and impact on survival outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nurses play a key role in managing surveillance programs for noncurative lung cancer patients. Programs should be built using codesign approaches to ensure best outcomes. Further research needs to be conducted, ensuring directed surveillance models that meet the holistic needs of patients.

Designing an education programme to improve quality of life for cancer survivors: a systematic review

Health and wellbeing education programmes, as part of the recovery package, are now recommended for all cancer patients on completion of treatment. There is limited evidence to determine whether such programmes improve the quality of life (QoL) for cancer survivors. The purpose of the systematic review was to synthesise the available research and provide recommendations for practice and education programme delivery. A critical appraisal and narrative synthesis of eligible randomised controlled trials showed that there was a small mean percentage difference in reported QoL for cancer survivors who participated in an education programme (8%) over those who received usual care alone (7%). Cancer-site specific programmes are recommended over generic programmes. The optimum time frame for programme delivery is between 3 and 12 months following treatment. Various methods of programme delivery are effective, including face-to-face group sessions and self-directed web-based programmes.

A prospective study of telephonic contact and subsequent physical follow-up of radically treated lung cancer patients

BACKGROUND

We tested the hypothesis that telephonic follow-up (FU) may offer a convenient and equivalent alternative to physical FU of radically treated lung cancer patients.

DESIGN

Prospective study carried out at a tertiary referral cancer care institute, Mumbai.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two hundred consecutive lung cancer patients treated with curative intent were followed up regularly with telephonic interviews paired with their routine physical FU visits. Patient satisfaction with the telephonic call and the physical visit, the anxiety level of the patient after meeting the physician and the economic burden of the visit to the patient were noted in a descriptive manner. Kappa statistics was used to assess concurrence between the telephonic and physical impression of disease status.

RESULTS

With a median FU duration of 21.5 months, the median satisfaction scores for telephonic and physical FU were 8 and 9, respectively. The prevalence and bias adjusted kappa (PABAK) score of the entire cohort of patients was 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI] =0.58-0.70). Data analyzed up to first disease progression/relapse on FU had a PABAK score of 0.71 (95% CI = 0.64-0.77) indicating substantial agreement. Patients with disease controlled at the FU had a significant PABAK score of 0.88 (95% CI = 0.80-0.94) indicating excellent concurrence. On average, each patient spent Rs. 5117.10 on travel and Rs. 3079.06 on lodging per FU visit.

CONCLUSION

Telephonic FU is substantially accurate in assessing disease status until the first relapse. In a resource-constrained country like India, it is worthwhile to further explore the benefits of such an alternative strategy.

Integrated care for resected early stage lung cancer: innovations and exploring patient needs

There is no consensus as to the duration and nature of follow-up following surgical resection with curative intent of lung cancer. The integration of cancer follow-up into primary care is likely to be a key future area for quality and cost-effective cancer care. Evidence from other solid cancer types demonstrates that such follow-up has no adverse outcomes, similar health-related quality of life, high patient satisfaction rates at a lower cost to the healthcare system. Core elements for successful models of shared cancer care are required: clear roles and responsibilities, timely effective communication, guidance on follow-up protocols and common treatments and rapid routes to (re)access specialist care. There is thus a need for improved communication between hospital specialists and primary care. Unmet needs for patients with early stage lung cancer are likely to include psychological symptoms and carer stress; the importance of smoking cessation may frequently be overlooked or underappreciated in the current hospital-based follow-up system. There is therefore a need for quality randomised controlled trials of patients with resected early stage lung cancer to establish optimal protocols for primary care-based follow-up and to more adequately address patients' and carers' unmet psychosocial needs, including the crucial role of smoking cessation.

Patients' expectations and preferences regarding cancer follow-up care

INTRODUCTION

Most survivors of cancer enter a follow-up routine after their treatment, the aim of which is to detect recurrence, provide psychological support, monitor treatment-related side-effects, and to evaluate care. Due to rising numbers of people with cancer and better survival of these patients, current follow-up routines are under pressure. We reviewed the literature on patients' expectations and preferences regarding this care.

METHODS

We systematically searched the databases of Pubmed, CINAHL, and PsychInfo. Studies were screened and data extraction was double performed by three authors. Data were collected from quantitative and qualitative studies and described thematically.

RESULTS

After screening, 12 full-text articles were included, comprising 849 patients aged from 28 to 90 years. Patients expect follow-up visits to detect recurrence of cancer. They want to undergo extensive testing to get reassurance. Furthermore, patients expect relevant information to be provided and to get advice about different aspects of their illness. Psychosocial support is also expected. Patients express a desire for consistency of care as well as continuity of care, and prefer long and intensive follow-up.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

After cancer, patients appear to lose confidence in their bodies and fear cancer recurrence after the end of treatment, which may lead to intensive screening wishes. This is not desirable, since care for cancer is already under pressure due to rising numbers of survivors. We have to ensure that follow-up routines are sustainable and effective. Patients should receive good information about the need for follow-up tests. Doctors should be trained to give this information.

An implementation evaluation of a wellness beyond cancer program survivorship class: Who is attending?

Breast and endometrial cancer survivors referred to the Wellness Beyond Cancer Program were invited to a survivorship education class. As not all survivors attended the class, this study aimed to identify socio-demographic and medical characteristics, and survivorship needs that predict attendance. A chart review was conducted on survivors who completed a needs assessment survey between 2012 and 2014 (n=144 endometrial; n=170 breast). Class attendees' characteristics were compared to those of non-attendees using t-tests, chi-square analyses, and regression analysis. Univariate analyses showed that age, distance from hospital, emotional and physical needs, and receiving chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy were associated with class attendance. Distance from hospital and physical needs were identified as multivariate predictors. The results of this study will help inform class content, improve class attendance, and identify attendees' characteristics.

Evaluation of two instruments of perceived symptom intensity in palliative care patients in an outpatient clinic

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the test-retest stability in assessments of perceived symptom intensity on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative. The possible interchangeability between the instruments and the patients' experiences of completing the instruments were also studied.

BACKGROUND

The two instruments assess the same symptoms, but the symptom intensity is assessed on 11-point numerical scales on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised and on four-point verbal descriptive scales on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative. Both instruments are commonly used; however, uncertainty exists about which instrument should be recommended and about the interchangeability of the instruments.

DESIGN

This study used a test-retest design with inter-scale comparisons.

METHODS

Data from 54 patients with cancer who were receiving palliative care in an oncology outpatient clinic were self-reported by the patients in the clinic, at home and when patients returned to the clinic.

RESULTS

The assessments on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative verbal rating scales showed a higher level of test-retest stability than the assessments on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised numerical scoring scales, indicating higher reliability. The correspondence between the verbal categories and the numerical scores of symptom intensity were low because different verbal categories were used by patients who assessed the same numerical score.

CONCLUSIONS

The test-retest stability in the assessments was higher on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative and the results show that assessments on the two instruments could not be used interchangeably. Therefore, the symptom instrument chosen must be specified and unchanged within a patient to improve efficacy in clinical practice.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised or the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative can be used for initial assessments of patients, but should not be compared or used interchangeably. It is vitally important to have individual follow-up for all patients who score an instrument.

Use of the lung cancer-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire EORTC QLQ-LC13 in clinical trials: A systematic review of the literature 20 years after its development

The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Lung Cancer 13 (QLQ-LC13) covers 13 typical symptoms of lung cancer patients and was the first module developed in conjunction with the EORTC core quality-of-life (QL) questionnaire. This review investigates how the module has been used and reported in cancer clinical trials in the 20 years since its publication. Thirty-six databases were searched with a prespecified algorithm. This search plus an additional hand search generated 770 hits, 240 of which were clinical studies. Two raters extracted data using a coding scheme. Analyses focused on the randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Of the 240 clinical studies that were identified using the LC13, 109 (45%) were RCTs. More than half of the RCTs were phase 3 trials (n = 58). Twenty RCTs considered QL as the primary endpoint, and 68 considered it as a secondary endpoint. QL results were addressed in the results section of the article (n = 89) or in the abstract (n = 92); and, in half of the articles, QL results were presented in the form of tables (n = 53) or figures (n = 43). Furthermore, QL results had an impact on the evaluation of the therapy that could be clearly demonstrated in the 47 RCTs that yielded QL differences between treatment and control groups. The EORTC QLQ-LC13 fulfilled its mission to be used as a standard instrument in lung cancer clinical trials. An update of the LC13 is underway to keep up with new therapeutic trends and to ensure optimized and relevant QL assessment in future trials.

Telephone calls postdischarge from hospital to home: a literature review

The oncology population is particularly affected by hospital readmissions because hospitalized patients with cancer often have complex needs. The complexity and diversity of care requirements create substantial challenges in planning for appropriate postdischarge support. Implementing postdischarge telephone calls in the population of patients with cancer could offer a low-cost intervention to address the complex needs of patients during the transition from hospital to home. The goal of the current literature review is to provide an understanding about postdischarge telephone calls in patients with cancer. Findings from this review support the notion that discharge phone calls could improve care continuity for patients transitioning from hospital to home. The literature review outlines information related to telephone call content, timing, and structure for healthcare systems that want to use a postdischarge telephone intervention for patients with cancer. However, additional research is needed to develop and test cancer-specific protocols.

Optimizing cancer care through mobile health

The survival rates for patients living with cancer are increasing, due to recent advances in detection, prevention and treatment. It has been estimated that there were 28 million cancer survivors around the world in 2012. In the UK, for patients diagnosed in 2007, it is predicted that more than half of them will survive their cancer for 5 years or more. A large majority of cancer survivors report unmet supportive care needs and distressing symptoms and adverse long-term consequences related to their cancer. Cancer management could be optimized to better meet patients demand through technology, including mobile health (m-Health). m-Health is defined as the use of mobile communications and network technologies for health care. m-Health can help both patients and health-care professionals and play an important part in managing and delivering cancer care including managing side effects, supporting drug adherence, providing cancer information, planning and follow up and detecting and diagnosing cancer. Health authorities have already published guidelines regulating m-Health to insure patient safety and improve the accountability of its applications.

Survivorship care plans in cancer: a systematic review of care plan outcomes

BACKGROUND

Eight years after the Institute of Medicine recommended survivorship care plans (SCPs) for all cancer survivors, this study systematically reviewed the evidence for their use.

METHODS

Studies evaluating outcomes after implementation of SCPs for cancer survivors were identified by searching databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane). Data were extracted and summarised.

RESULTS

Ten prospective studies (2286 survivors) met inclusion criteria (5 randomised controlled trials (RCTs)). Study populations included survivors of breast, gynaecological, colorectal and childhood cancer. Several models of SCP were evaluated (paper based/on-line, oncologist/nurse/primary-care physician-delivered and different templates). No significant effect of SCPs was found on survivor distress, satisfaction with care, cancer-care coordination or oncological outcomes in RCTs. Breast cancer survivors with SCPs were better able to correctly identify the clinician responsible for their follow-up care. One study suggested a positive impact on reducing unmet needs. Levels of survivor satisfaction with, and self-reported understanding of, their SCP were very high. Feasibility was raised by health professionals as a significant barrier, as SCPs took 1-4 h of their time to develop.

CONCLUSIONS

Emerging evidence shows very few measurable benefits of SCPs. Survivors reported high levels of satisfaction with SCPs. Resource issues were identified as a significant barrier to implementation.

Comprehensive long-term care of patients with lung cancer: development of a novel thoracic survivorship program

BACKGROUND

Recent advances have improved the likelihood of long-term survival for patients with lung cancer. However, little attention has been given to the growing need for dedicated survivorship care for these patients. To address this unmet need, we developed a unique follow-up care model.

METHODS

In 2006, we convened a multidisciplinary working group to design a thoracic survivorship program (TSP) that provides follow-up by a nurse practitioner (NP) trained in survivorship care. Patients with early-stage lung cancer who were disease free for at least 1 year after resection were eligible for the program, which incorporates a standardized approach to cancer surveillance. Data on symptoms and outcomes were prospectively collected. Real-time electronic medical documentation was developed to optimize communication with primary physicians.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed for the initial phase of the program, which comprised 655 patients. Ninety-two percent of eligible survivors who remained disease free chose to continue their care in the TSP, rather than receive follow-up with their thoracic surgeon. Clinically significant posttreatment symptoms were common, including fatigue (46%), anxiety (32%), chronic pain (25%), dyspnea (14%), and depression (12%). The majority of recurrences (72%) and second primary cancers (91%) in this cohort were identified by scheduled chest computed tomography at TSP visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Survivorship care for patients with lung cancer, delivered in our NP-led TSP, is feasible, effective, and well accepted by patients. Through the implementation of a uniform self-sustaining patient-centered system, the TSP model improves on the variation of physician-led follow-up care.

The role of helplines in cancer care: intertwining emotional support with information or advice-seeking needs

Helplines are core feature of the contemporary U.K. health care system, however little is known about callers' experiences of seeking cancer-related telephone help. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 32 cancer helpline callers. The findings suggest cancer helplines offer callers (1) time to discuss their issues, (2) anonymity, (3) convenience, and (4) an open outlet for anyone affected by cancer including family/friends. Further, the findings highlighted that callers' help-seeking behavior was multifaceted, with their psychosocial needs being intrinsically intertwined with their information or advice-seeking needs. The implications are discussed in relation to the role of cancer helplines in the healthcare system.

Nurse-led follow-up at home vs. conventional medical outpatient clinic follow-up in patients with incurable upper gastrointestinal cancer: a randomized study

CONTEXT

Upper gastrointestinal cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. The multidimensional problems of incurable patients require close monitoring and frequent support, which cannot sufficiently be provided during conventional one to two month follow-up visits to the outpatient clinic.

OBJECTIVES

To compare nurse-led follow-up at home with conventional medical follow-up in the outpatient clinic for patients with incurable primary or recurrent esophageal, pancreatic, or hepatobiliary cancer.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to nurse-led follow-up at home or conventional medical follow-up in the outpatient clinic. Outcome parameters were quality of life (QoL), patient satisfaction, and health care consumption, measured by different questionnaires at one and a half and four months after randomization. As well, cost analyses were done for both follow-up strategies in the first four months.

RESULTS

In total, 138 patients were randomized, of which 66 (48%) were evaluable. At baseline, both groups were similar with respect to clinical and sociodemographic characteristics and health-related QoL. Patients in the nurse-led follow-up group were significantly more satisfied with the visits, whereas QoL and health care consumption within the first four months were comparable between the two groups. Nurse-led follow-up was less expensive than conventional medical follow-up. However, the total costs for the first four months of follow-up in this study were higher in the nurse-led follow-up group because of a higher frequency of visits.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that conventional medical follow-up is interchangeable with nurse-led follow-up. A cost utility study is necessary to determine the preferred frequency and duration of the home visits.

Survivorship programs and care planning

Formal cancer survivorship care is a growing focus internationally. This article provides a broad overview of the national strategies currently in progress for the development of survivorship programs and care plans within the United States and across Europe. The different approaches taken in their implementation, staffing, and clinical focus are highlighted, with an emphasis on how they are incorporated into various models of care. The considerable variation in making survivorship a formal period of care across countries and health care systems is discussed, including the factors influencing these differences. A review of research focused on the evaluation of definitions and outcomes is provided along with a discussion of important areas requiring future research.

WITHDRAWN: Non-pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in advanced stages of malignant and non-malignant diseases

This review is now out of date although it is correct as of the date of publication [Issue 2, 2008]. The authors are developing a new protocol which will replace this review. Publication of the protocol is expected in 2014, and serves to update the existing review and incorporate the latest evidence into a new Cochrane Review. The latest version of this review (available in 'Other versions' tab on The Cochrane Library) may still be useful to readers until the new review is published.

In 2016, the replacement review titled 'Non‐pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in advanced stages of malignant and non‐malignant diseases' was deregistered and split into four separate reviews of individual interventions: Respiratory interventions for breathlessness in adults with advanced diseases; Physical interventions for breathlessness in adults with advanced diseases; Cognitive‐emotional interventions for breathlessness in adults with advanced diseases; Multi‐dimensional interventions for breathlessness in adults with advanced diseases.

At September 2020, these replacement titles were deregistered (Multi‐dimensional interventions) or the protocols withdrawn (Cognitive‐emotional interventions; Multi‐dimensional interventions; Respiratory interventions) as they did not meet Cochrane standards or expectations.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

General practitioners' perceptions of their role in cancer follow-up care: a qualitative study in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

In the last few decades there has been a considerable increase in the number of cancer survivors. Health policy makers would like to see cancer follow-up care moved from secondary to primary care.

METHOD

Between 2008 and 2010, a qualitative study among primary health care professionals was performed to get more insight into the way they care for cancer survivors. Analysed was whether a coordinating role in cancer survivorship care would fit in with the practical logic underlying the way the general practitioners work.

RESULTS

In their everyday work, general practitioners are used to provide care in a reactive way. Based on this habitus, they classify their patients into 'not special' and 'special' ones. Since general practitioners label cancer survivors as 'not special,' they expect these patients to take the initiative to ask for help and present their complaints in a clear and complete way. Their habitus as a gatekeeper implies that they are reticent about referring patients to other primary health care professionals. In regard to 'not special' patients, such as cancer survivors, general practitioners appear to build on the patients' own strengths.

CONCLUSION

The emphasis on a wait-and-see attitude in contemporary Dutch general practice, as well as the general practitioners' role as a gatekeeper are at odds with the proactive and holistic approach inherent to a coordinating role in cancer follow-up. Therefore, we assume that it will be difficult for general practitioners to shape a pivotal role in this care.

What is the most practical, optimal, and cost effective method for performing follow-up after lung cancer surgery, and by whom should it be done?

Surgery is the treatment of choice for early stage non-small cell lung cancer. In this context, postoperative follow-up is important to diagnose late postoperative complications, as well as to detect recurring cancer or new primaries as early as possible. There is, however, no high-quality evidence regarding the benefits of monitoring programs on survival and quality of life. Most studies recommend clinical and radiological follow-up (radiograph or chest computed tomography) performed more intensively during the first two years and annually thereafter. The physician doing the follow-up can be the thoracic surgeon, the diagnosing physician, or the family physician.

Patients' and oncologists' views on the treatment and care of advanced ovarian cancer in the U.K.: results from the ADVOCATE study

Background:

Most patients presenting with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) eventually relapse. Symptom palliation, maintenance of quality of life (QoL) and prolongation of life are primary therapeutic goals.

Methods:

Sixty-six UK oncologists completed an online survey about AOC management. Two hundred and two patients were interviewed about care, treatment experiences and expectations.

Results:

Prior to diagnosis, 34% (69 out of 202) of women had ⩾3 symptoms associated with AOC. Twenty-one per cent (43 out of 202) thought poor symptom recognition by general practitioners (GPs) delayed diagnosis. Amelioration of side effects experienced was variable, for example, only 54% (68 out of 127) distressed by alopecia had received sufficient information about it. Clinicians were asked ‘What minimum gain in progression-free survival (PFS) would make you feel it worthwhile to offer maintenance therapy?' 48% (24 out of 50) indicated 5–6 months, but 52% (26 out of 50) believed patients would find PFS of 3–4 months acceptable. When patients were presented with hypothetical scenarios, 33% (52 out of 160) would require 1–2 months extra life, 6% (10 out of 160) 3–4 months, 31% (49 out of 160) 5–6 months, and 31% (49 out of 160) ⩾7 months. However, 86% (173 out of 202) would accept treatment that improved QoL without prolongation of life. When asked what was most important, 33% (67 out of 201) said QoL, 9% (19 out of 201) length of life and 57% (115 out of 201) said both were equally important.

Conclusion:

Clinicians' and patients' experiences, expectations and priorities about OC management may differ.

The process and outcomes of a nurse-led colorectal cancer follow-up clinic

AIM

Evidence suggests that follow-up after colorectal cancer improves survival. Colorectal cancer is so common that patient follow-up can overwhelm a service, affecting the ability to see new referrals and reassess patients seen previously who have new symptoms. In order to cope with this demand a nurse-led follow-up service was started in 2004. We aimed to review the results of a nurse-led colorectal cancer follow-up clinic.

METHOD

Between 1 December 2004 and 31 January 2011, patients who underwent resection for colorectal cancer were followed up by a nurse specialist according to a protocol determined by the colorectal surgeons in the unit. All patient details were recorded prospectively in a purpose designed database.

RESULTS

Nine hundred and fifty patients were followed up over 7 years. Some 368 patients were discharged from the follow-up programme, 474 patients remain actively involved in the programme and 108 patients died. Of the patients discharged from the follow-up scheme 269 (73%) were discharged to their general practitioner free of disease after 5 years. Of the 108 who patients died, 98 were as a result of colorectal cancer. Twenty patients (2.1%) were identified with local (peri-anastomotic) disease recurrence and 93 patients (9.8%) were found to have developed distant metastatic disease. Of these, 65 patients (6.8%) were referred for palliative care and 28 (2.9%) had surgery for focal metastatic disease of whom 18 were still alive at the time of this analysis.

CONCLUSION

This paper shows that a nurse-led clinic for colorectal cancer follow-up can achieve satisfactory results with detection rates of recurrent or metastatic disease comparable to consultant follow-up. A nurse-led clinic provides the benefits of follow-up without overwhelming the consultant colorectal surgical clinic practice.

Survival benefits from follow-up of patients with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The burden of lung cancer is high for patients and carers. Care after treatment may have the potential to impact on this. We reviewed the published literature on follow-up strategies intended to improve survival and quality of life.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed studies comparing follow-up regimes in lung cancer. Primary outcomes were overall survival (comparing more intensive versus less intensive follow-up) and survival comparing symptomatic with asymptomatic recurrence. Quality of life was identified as a secondary outcome measure. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals from eligible studies were synthesized.

RESULTS

Nine studies that examined the role of more intensive follow-up for patients with lung cancer were included (eight observational studies and one randomized controlled trial). The studies of curative resection included patients with non-small cell lung cancer Stages I to III disease, and studies of palliative treatment follow-up included limited and extensive stage patients with small cell lung cancer. A total of 1669 patients were included in the studies. Follow-up programs were heterogeneous and multifaceted. A nonsignificant trend for intensive follow-up to improve survival was identified, for the curative intent treatment subgroup (HR: 0.83; 95% confidence interval: 0.66-1.05). Asymptomatic recurrence was associated with increased survival, which was statistically significant HR: 0.61 (0.50-0.74) (p < 0.01); quality of life was only assessed in one study.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis must be interpreted with caution due to the potential for bias in the included studies: observed benefit may be due to systematic differences in outcomes rather than intervention effects. Some benefit was noted from intensive follow-up strategies. More robust data, in the form of randomized controlled trials, are needed to confirm these findings as the review is based primarily on observational studies. Future research should also include patient-centered outcomes to investigate the impact of follow-up regimes on living with lung cancer and psychosocial well-being.

Patients' and staff's experiences of multidisciplinary follow-up for high-grade glioma after radical radiotherapy

Meeting the complex needs of patients with high-grade glioma requires multidisciplinary input. How best to provide care after initial treatment ends is contentious. This study explored the experiences of patients and staff at one UK centre where regular multidisciplinary clinics and brain scanning is provided. In-depth interviews conducted with 10 patients and six staff were transcribed and analysed qualitatively. Patients reported: supportive, individualised care with familiar staff; good communication; that regular scanning was reassuring. Staff believed that team follow-up facilitated immediate decision-making and referral, and reduced visits. They felt that patients value seeing their scans. Patients and staff described positive and negative experiences of multidisciplinary follow-up. There is need to investigate the impact of different approaches to ongoing care.

A UK-wide survey of follow-up practices for patients with high-grade glioma treated with radical intent

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE

High-grade glioma profoundly affects patients and their families. The best ongoing care for patients completing radical treatment is uncertain. To address this issue a UK-wide audit surveying the follow-up practices of multidisciplinary cancer teams was conducted.

METHOD

An online survey package was used with a paper version available.

RESULTS

Of 102 clinicians approached 86 replied, a response rate of 84%. Three-monthly outpatient department appointments led by an oncologist and a specialist nurse were the norm, but more controversially, some centres conduct joint clinics with the whole neurosurgical/oncology team present or available. Nurse-led telephone follow-up in place of hospital visits is uncommon. Regular scanning is conducted despite the clinical benefits being contentious. Access to a range of allied services providing supportive care is considered, but the actual levels of need and the efficiency with which they are delivered require further investigation.

CONCLUSIONS

The picture of UK follow-up practices revealed by this survey demonstrates that research is now needed to determine what preferences patients and families have for follow-up and their satisfaction with these.

The meaning and significance of routine follow-up in lung cancer - a qualitative study of patients' experiences and interpretations

PURPOSE

Questions have been raised about the benefits of routine follow-up for patients with lung cancer and a number of studies have now explored alternative models of care for this patient group. This study explores the experiences of lung cancer patients attending routine follow-up and illustrates factors which might influence patients' interpretations of the meaning and significance of follow-up.

METHOD

This qualitative study was undertaken to gain insight into patients' experiences of attending routine follow-up clinics after treatment completion. A purposive sample of ten patients was interviewed, including patients of both genders, different lung cancer types, treatment intent, treatment received, performance status and experience of follow-up.

RESULTS

Analysis of the transcripts revealed patients' confidence and faith in their consultants and the importance of having a connection with the oncology department. The meaning and significance of follow-up is constructed by what they bring to the consultation (anxiety, vulnerability, uncertainty, symptoms) as well as what happens within that consultation (reassurance, relief, encouragement). Although some participants were anxious about attending, all express expectation and desire for follow-up to continue. Many were, however, prepared to consider nurse-led follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Although small, this study highlights the significance that patients with lung cancer attach to attending follow-up clinics and the need to consider patients' experiences in the design of future follow-up care and also consideration should be given to complementary and innovative approaches to follow-up.

Patient satisfaction with GP-led melanoma follow-up: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There are no universally accepted guidelines for the follow-up of individuals with cutaneous melanoma. Furthermore, to date, there have been no randomised controlled trials of different models of melanoma follow-up care. This randomised controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the effects of GP-led melanoma follow-up on patient satisfaction, follow-up guideline compliance, anxiety and depression, as well as health status.

METHODS

A randomised controlled trial of GP-led follow-up of cutaneous melanoma was conducted over a period of 1 year with assessment by self-completed questionnaires and review of general practice-held medical records at baseline and 12 months later. It took place in 35 general practices in North-east Scotland. Subjects were 142 individuals (51.4% women 48.6% men; mean (s.d.) age 59.2 (15.2) years previously treated for cutaneous melanoma and free of recurrent disease. The intervention consisted of protocol-driven melanoma reviews in primary care, conducted by trained GPs and supported by centralised recall, rapid access pathway to secondary care and a patient information booklet. The main outcome measure was patient satisfaction measured by questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were adherence to guidelines, health status measured by Short Form-36 and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.

RESULTS

There were significant improvements in 5 out of 15 aspects of patient satisfaction during the study year in those receiving GP-led melanoma follow-up (all P<or=0.01). The intervention group was significantly more satisfied with 7 out of 15 aspects of care at follow-up after adjustment for potential confounders. There was significantly greater adherence to guidelines in the intervention group during the study year. There was no significant difference in health status or anxiety and depression between intervention and control groups at either baseline or outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

GP-led follow-up is feasible, engenders greater satisfaction in those patients who receive it, permits closer adherence to guidelines and does not result in adverse effects on health status or anxiety and depression when compared with traditional hospital-based follow-up for melanoma.

Experiences of follow-up after treatment in patients with prostate cancer: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To develop an understanding of experiences of follow-up in patients with prostate cancer, to seek explanations as to why men's needs might not be well met, and explore views on the possible role of primary care in follow-up. The experiences of these patients, and views on the delivery of follow-up care, have been relatively neglected compared to those diagnosed with other cancers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 35 patients were recruited from 20 practices across three regions in the UK. Maximum variation was sought by purposely sampling by age (59-82 years), treatment, length (0.75-14 years) and mode of follow-up.

RESULTS

Patients' descriptions of the content and organization of follow-up showed the shortcomings of follow-up, which included system failings causing patients to be lost to follow-up, and unmet psychosexual needs. Patients were mainly positive about the prospect of follow-up taking place outside the hospital setting. However, some expressed concerns about current follow-up practices and suggested several improvements that need considering if primary care were to take a greater role.

CONCLUSION

This study identified some general deficiencies with the current system of follow-up, and our data indicate that primary care could have a role in addressing some of these.

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

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.

Follow-up of cancer in primary care versus secondary care: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Cancer follow-up has traditionally been undertaken in secondary care, but there are increasing calls to deliver it in primary care.

AIM

To compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of primary versus secondary care follow-up of cancer patients, determine the effectiveness of the integration of primary care in routine hospital follow-up, and evaluate the impact of patient-initiated follow-up on primary care.

DESIGN OF STUDY

Systematic review.

SETTING

Primary and secondary care settings.

METHOD

A search was carried out of 19 electronic databases, online trial registries, conference proceedings, and bibliographies of included studies. The review included comparative studies or economic evaluations of primary versus secondary care follow-up, hospital follow-up with formal primary care involvement versus conventional hospital follow-up, and hospital follow-up versus patient-initiated or minimal follow-up if the study reported the impact on primary care.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference for patient wellbeing, recurrence rate, survival, recurrence-related serious clinical events, diagnostic delay, or patient satisfaction. GP-led breast cancer follow-up was cheaper than hospital follow-up. Intensified primary health care resulted in increased home-care nurse contact, and improved discharge summary led to increased GP contact. Evaluation of patient-initiated or minimal follow-up found no statistically significant impact on the number of GP consultations or cancer-related referrals.

CONCLUSION

Weak evidence suggests that breast cancer follow-up in primary care is effective. Interventions improving communication between primary and secondary care could lead to greater GP involvement. Discontinuation of formal follow-up may not increase GP workload. However, the quality of the data in general was poor, and no firm conclusions can be reached.

Follow-up care for cancer survivors: views of the younger adult

Background:

Since the launch of the National Cancer Survivorship Initiative, there has been a surge of interest surrounding the value and organisation of long-term follow-up care after cancer treatment. We report the views of 309 adult cancer survivors (aged 18–45 years) on provision of follow-up and preferences for care.

Methods:

A total of 207 survivors completed questionnaires before and after routine consultant-led follow-up appointments and 102 were recruited by post. Measures of health status (including late effects, perceived vulnerability to late effects and quality of life), reasons for attending follow-up (clinical and supportive), issues to be discussed at follow-up and preferences for different models of care were assessed.

Results:

In all, 59% of the survivors reported experiencing one or more cancer-related health problems. Survivors rated clinical reasons for attending follow-up more highly than supportive reasons (P<0.001), although nutritional advice and counselling were considered useful (60 and 47%, respectively). Those still receiving scheduled follow-up appointments did not discuss the range of issues intended with ‘late effects’ and ‘fertility’, which were particularly under-discussed. Hospital rather than GP follow-up was more highly rated.

Conclusion:

Survivors value the clinical reassurance currently provided by consultant-led care. However, supportive needs are not systematically addressed. Multi-disciplinary services are recommended to meet supportive needs in addition to clinical care.

Nurse-led vs. conventional physician-led follow-up for patients with cancer: systematic review

AIM

This paper is a report of a systematic review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of nurse-led follow-up for patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND

As cancer survivorship increases, conventional follow-up puts a major burden on outpatient services. Nurse-led follow-up is a promising alternative. Data sources. Searches were conducted covering a period from inception to February 2007 of 19 electronic databases, seven online trial registries, five conference proceedings reference lists of previous reviews and included studies.

REVIEW METHODS

Standard systematic review methodology was used. Comparative studies and economic evaluations of nurse-led vs. physician-led follow-up were eligible. Studies comparing different types of nurse-led follow-up were excluded. Any cancer was considered; any outcome measure included.

RESULTS

Four randomised controlled trials were identified, two including cost analyses. There were no statistically significant differences in survival, recurrence or psychological morbidity. One study showed better HRQL measures for nurse-led follow-up, but one showed no difference, two showed a statistically significant difference for patient satisfaction, but two did not. Patients with lung cancer were more satisfied with nurse-led telephone follow-up and more were able to die at home. Patients with breast cancer thought patient-initiated follow-up convenient, but found conventional follow-up more reassuring. One study showed the cost of nurse-led follow-up to be less than that of physician-led follow-up, but no statistical comparison was made.

CONCLUSION

Patients appeared satisfied with nurse-led follow-up. Patient-initiated or telephone follow-up could be practical alternatives to conventional care. However, well-conducted research is needed before equivalence to physician-led follow-up can be assured in terms of survival, recurrence, patient well-being and cost-effectiveness.

Roles of the urologist and nurse from the perspective of patients with prostate cancer receiving luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue therapy

OBJECTIVES

To establish the roles of the urologist, general practitioner (GP) and nurse from the perspective of the patient with prostate cancer receiving hormone therapy, and to assess patient satisfaction, in particular with management and information needs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with prostate cancer receiving luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue (LHRH-a) therapy were recruited by a representative sample of 58 French urologists (March to April 2007) and invited to complete a 42-item questionnaire.

RESULTS

In all, 350 representative patients participated in the study; >90% were totally or quite satisfied with the information given by their urologist at diagnosis and the start of treatment. Their main contact during treatment was with the nurse who gave the injection (84% of patients). The nurse's main role was to provide clarity (60% of patients), guidance (35%) and support to the family (28%). Fewer patients discussed disease stage and progression with their nurse (29%) than with a doctor (urologist, 63%; or GP, 61%). Fewer also discussed treatment (24% vs 32%) but as many patients discussed the impact of their disease and treatment with their nurse as with their doctor (e.g. 33% discussed general health and fatigue with the nurse, vs 26% with the urologist). The need for contact with a health professional was greater during the early stages of treatment. Patients treated for <12 months with 3-monthly injections were less likely to be in favour of spacing injections than patients treated for >or=3 years.

CONCLUSION

The patient consults the urologist for reliable information on disease and treatment, and to the GP for further support, if needed, but the nurse has the pivotal role. A 3-monthly injection schedule enables regular face-to-face contact between the nurse and the patient and their family, and contributes towards the patient's coping strategies and quality of life.

Non-pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in advanced stages of malignant and non-malignant diseases

BACKGROUND

Breathlessness is a common and distressing symptom in the advanced stages of malignant and non-malignant diseases. Appropriate management requires both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine the effectiveness of non-pharmacological and non-invasive interventions to relieve breathlessness in participants suffering from the five most common conditions causing breathlessness in advanced disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following databases: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index Expanded, AMED, The Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Trials Register, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness in June 2007. We also searched various websites and reference lists of relevant articles and textbooks.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled and controlled clinical trials assessing the effects of non-pharmacological and non-invasive interventions to relieve breathlessness in participants described as suffering from breathlessness due to advanced stages of cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung disease, chronic heart failure or motor neurone disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed relevant studies for inclusion. Data extraction and quality assessment was performed by three review authors and checked by two other review authors. Meta-analysis was not attempted due to heterogeneity of studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-seven studies were included (2532 participants) and categorised as follows: single component interventions with subcategories of walking aids (n = 7), distractive auditory stimuli (music) (n = 6), chest wall vibration (CWV, n = 5), acupuncture/acupressure (n = 5), relaxation (n = 4), neuro-electrical muscle stimulation (NMES, n = 3) and fan (n = 2). Multi-component interventions were categorised in to counselling and support (n = 5), breathing training (n = 3), counselling and support with breathing-relaxation training (n = 2), case management (n = 2) and psychotherapy (n = 2). There was a high strength of evidence that NMES and CWV could relieve breathlessness and moderate strength for the use of walking aids and breathing training. There is a low strength of evidence that acupuncture/acupressure is helpful. There is not enough data to judge the evidence for distractive auditory stimuli (music), relaxation, fan, counselling and support, counselling and support with breathing-relaxation training, case management and psychotherapy. Most studies have been conducted in COPD patients, only a few studies included participants with other conditions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Breathing training, walking aids, NMES and CWV appear to be effective non-pharmacological interventions for relieving breathlessness in advanced stages of disease.

Developing supportive care for family members of people with lung cancer: a feasibility study

PURPOSE

Families provide crucial support, yet their own needs often go unrecognised and, as a consequence, remain unmet. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a newly developed supportive intervention for family members of patients with lung cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A consecutive convenience sample of 25 family members of people with lung cancer received an individualised supportive intervention from a support nurse over a period of 12 weeks. This involved in-depth assessment followed up with a tailored plan of ongoing support to address informational, emotional, social and practical needs. A concurrent mixed method design explored perceptions and outcomes of those receiving the intervention and assess its appropriateness, acceptability and feasibility. Data were collected through a semi structured telephone interview with family members, and support nurses maintained a contact log. A questionnaire addressed emotional well-being [general health questionnaire (GHQ-12)], quality of life [quality of life family version (Family QoL)] and needs for care [family inventory of needs (FIN)]-at baseline and week 12.

RESULTS

Family members perceived they had derived benefit from the intervention. Certain elements clearly emerged as important for participants, including being listened to by someone who could facilitate emotional expression, being provided with individually tailored information and receiving practical help and advice. Outcomes mapped to five main areas: information needs, communication between family members, emotional well-being, being supported and facilitating family member's role. There was a trend for more needs to be met and quality of life and emotional well-being to improve at week 12.

CONCLUSION

This study has demonstrated that a supportive intervention for family members of patients with lung cancer can be delivered to good effect by experienced cancer nurses. The active components of the intervention have been distinguished and provide the basis for development of a larger sufficiently powered trial.