Timely cancer diagnosis and management as a chronic condition: opportunities for primary care

A systematic review and qualitative synthesis of the experience of living with colorectal cancer as a chronic illness

OBJECTIVE

Advances in detection and treatment mean that over 50% of people diagnosed with colorectal cancer can expect to live for more than ten years following treatment. Studies show that colorectal cancer patients can experience numerous physical and psychological late effects. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and qualitative synthesis on the experiences of living with colorectal cancer as a chronic illness.

METHODS

Electronic searches of online databases were undertaken of peer reviewed and grey literature. Forty-seven papers were eligible for inclusion in the review, capturing the experiences of over 700 participants, the findings from which were analysed using thematic synthesis.

RESULTS

Three higher order concepts were identified which were prevalent across studies and countries and which related to the supportive care needs of patients; common physical and psychological late effects of cancer; and methods of psychosocial adjustment to living with and beyond colorectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

The results are considered in the context of existing theoretical approaches to chronic illness and the need to develop a theoretical approach which fully encapsulates the experience of living with colorectal cancer as a chronic illness in order to inform interventions to support patient adjustment.

Sex-based differences in time to surgical care among pancreatic cancer patients: A national study of Medicare beneficiaries

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to characterize time from cancer symptoms to diagnosis and time from diagnosis to surgical treatment among patients undergoing pancreatectomy for cancer.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries who underwent pancreatectomy for cancer between 2013 and 2017 were identified using the 100% Medicare Inpatient Standard Analytic Files. Mixed effects negative binomial regression models were utilized to determine which factors were associated with the number of weeks to diagnosis and pancreatic resection.

RESULTS

Among 7647 Medicare beneficiaries, two-thirds (n = 5127, 67%) had symptoms associated with a pancreatic cancer diagnosis before surgery. Median time from the first symptom to diagnosis was 6 weeks (IQR: 1-25) and the median time from diagnosis to surgery was 4 weeks (IQR: 2-15). In risk-adjusted models, female patients had 13% longer waiting times from identification of a related symptom to pancreatic cancer diagnosis (OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.05-1.21) and 12% longer waiting times from diagnosis to surgery (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.07-1.18). Older age was associated with 10% longer waiting times from symptom identification to diagnosis (p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Female and older patients had longer wait times between symptom presentation and pancreatic cancer diagnosis. Sex-based disparities in cancer care need to be recognized and addressed by policymakers and health care institutions.

A Cancer Patient Journey: Complete Review During Acute Treatment Phase

Purpose: Cancer is a chronic illness with acute episodes lasting for years. Most cancer patients have coexisting comorbidities, which affect cancer treatment outcomes and make a shared care model for chronic diseases essential. There is a considerable gap between the achievable and delivered quality of care for cancer patients. Methods: We used a case study approach to examine the complexity of cancer management, from the perspective of one person's case as interpreted by the care team. It allowed the complexity of cancer management to retain its holistic and meaningful characteristics. We interviewed the patient, caregiver, primary care physician (PCP), and oncologist. Interviews were audio recorded and analyzed with ATLASti, qualitative statistical software. Participants also completed a basic demographic survey. Common themes were identified, analyzed, and discussed. Results: Main themes were lack of longitudinal relationship with PCP, communication barriers, and ambiguous health care provider roles. Communication barriers can be associated with the other two main themes. Conclusion: Our results showed that shared care for cancer management is lacking during the acute cancer treatment phase. Communication barriers between the PCP and oncologist along with lack of continuity of care and unclear role of the PCP are major contributors for fragmented cancer care in U.S. health care system.

Differences in primary care providers’ and oncologists’ views on communication and coordination of care during active treatment of patients with cancer and comorbidities

Introduction

Management of comorbid diseases in patients with cancer is often unclear. The purpose of our study was to identify differences and similarities between primary care providers and oncologists’ knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs regarding coordination of care and comorbid disease management for patients undergoing active cancer treatment.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study using an anonymous self-administered survey which was available to approximately 600 providers in primary care and medical oncology practicing in both outpatient and inpatient settings from March to December 2014 at three academic hospitals in New York City (Mount Sinai Hospital, Mount Sinai Beth Israel, and Weill Cornell). Our survey instrument assessed physician knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs using a clinical vignette of a cancer patient undergoing active treatment. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the demographic and practice details of survey responses, and univariate analyses were used to assess differences in responses between primary care providers and oncologists.

Results

The survey was completed by 203 providers, including 127 primary care providers (62.5%), 32 medical oncologists (15.8%), 11 palliative care physicians (5.4%), and 33 nurse practitioners or physician assistants (16.3%). Medical oncologists admitted more uncertainty regarding who should manage preventive care as compared to primary care providers (34.4% vs. 16.5%, p = 0.02), whereas primary care providers were more concerned about duplicated care (22.8% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.03). Both primary care providers and medical oncologists agreed that diabetes should be actively managed during cancer treatment. More primary care providers felt less strict glycemic control was allowable (56.8% vs. 37.5%, p = 0.05) and that it is allowable for patients to miss some diabetes-related visits (80.6% vs. 56.3%, p = 0.01).

Discussion

Primary care providers and medical oncologists differ in their knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs regarding coordination of care and management of comorbid conditions in patients undergoing cancer treatment. These differences reflect systemic challenges to provision of care to cancer patients and the need for a model of care coordination.

Are general practitioners getting the information they need from hospitals and specialists to provide quality cancer care for Indigenous Australians?

BACKGROUND

Cancer care involves many different healthcare providers. Delayed or inaccurate communication between specialists and general practitioners (GP) may negatively affect care.

AIM

To describe the pattern and variation of communication between primary healthcare (PHC) services and hospitals and specialists in relation to the patient's cancer care.

METHODS

A retrospective audit of clinical records of Indigenous Australians diagnosed with cancer during 2010-2016 identified through 10 PHC services in Queensland is described. Poisson regression was used to model the dichotomous outcome availability of hospital discharge summary versus not.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patient records was audited; 115 of those patients visited the PHC service for cancer-related care after cancer diagnosis; 40.0% visited the service before a discharge summary was available, and 36.5% of the patients had no discharge summary in their medical notes. While most discharge summaries noted important information about the patient's cancer, 42.4% lacked details regarding the discharge medications regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

Deficits in communication and information transfer between specialists and GP may adversely affect patient care. Indigenous Australians are a relatively disadvantaged group that experience poor health outcomes and relatively poor access to care. The low proportion of discharge summaries noting discharge medication regimen is of concern among Indigenous Australians with cancer who have high comorbidity burden and low health literacy. Our findings provide an insight into some of the factors associated with quality of cancer care, and may provide guidance for focus areas for further research and improvement efforts.

“Better pathways of Care”: Suggested Improvements to the Emergency Department management of People with Advanced Cancer

Objective: It is difficult to provide optimal care to people with advanced cancer presenting to emergency departments (EDs). Recent data suggest that the ED environment, the skills and priorities of treating staff, and the lack of clear communication related to goals of care contribute to the difficulty. By exploring the views of emergency, palliative care (PC), and oncology clinicians on the care of these patients, this study aimed to describe potential solutions. Methods: This qualitative study involved focus groups with clinicians at two major hospitals and two community PC services in Melbourne, Australia, and semi-structured telephone interviews with emergency clinicians from all other Australian states and territories. Discussions were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis identified ways to improve or enhance care. Results: Throughout discussions with 94 clinicians, a number of possible improvements to care were raised; these were broadly grouped into service areas: clinical care, pathways, information access, and education. Conclusion: The provision of care to patients with advanced cancer in the ED occurs across sites, across disciplines, and across teams. To make improvements to care, we must address these complexities. The improvements suggested in this study place the patient (and the patient's family) at the centre of care.

An interpretative phenomenological analysis of the experience of living with colorectal cancer as a chronic illness

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to explore the lived experiences of patients living with cancer as a chronic illness.

BACKGROUND

Due to recent advances in detection and treatment, cancer is now regarded as a chronic illness. However, living with cancer as a chronic illness can lead to a number of physical and psychosocial consequences all of which can lead to uncertainty over how patients view and plan for their future.

DESIGN

A longitudinal qualitative study.

METHODS

Individuals attending oncology follow-up clinics with their clinical nurse specialist at a hospital in the North East of England were invited to participate in two semistructured interviews over a 6-month period. A total of six individuals consented to participate, of whom two were women. One participant could not be contacted for the second interview, resulting in 11 interviews. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis.

RESULTS

Two super-ordinate themes emerged from the analysis: physical and psychological consequences of cancer and adapting to life after treatment.

CONCLUSION

The experience of future disorientation was common among participants; however, this was impacted on by a number of factors such as functional impairment and fear of recurrence. Furthermore, future disorientation does not appear to be stable and may ease as patients begin to adjust to the uncertainty of living with colorectal cancer as a chronic illness.

Perceptions of shared care among survivors of colorectal cancer from non-English-speaking and English-speaking backgrounds: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors experience difficulty navigating complex care pathways. Sharing care between GPs and specialist services has been proposed to improve health outcomes in cancer survivors following hospital discharge. Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) groups are known to have poorer outcomes following cancer treatment but little is known about their perceptions of shared care following surgery for CRC. This study aimed to explore how non-English-speaking and English-speaking patients perceive care to be coordinated amongst various health practitioners.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study using data from face to face semi-structured interviews and one focus group in a culturally diverse area of Sydney with non-English-speaking and English-speaking CRC survivors. Participants were recruited in community settings and were interviewed in English, Spanish or Vietnamese. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed by researchers fluent in those languages. Data were coded and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Twenty-two CRC survivors participated in the study. Participants from non-English-speaking and English-speaking groups described similar barriers to care, but non-English-speaking participants described additional communication difficulties and perceived discrimination. Non-English-speaking participants relied on family members and bilingual GPs for assistance with communication and care coordination. Factors that influenced the care pathways used by participants and how care was shared between the specialist and GP included patient and practitioner preference, accessibility, complexity of care needs, and requirements for assistance with understanding information and navigating the health system, that were particularly difficult for non-English-speaking CRC survivors.

CONCLUSIONS

Both non-English-speaking and English-speaking CRC survivors described a blend of specialist-led or GP-led care depending on the complexity of care required, informational needs, and how engaged and accessible they perceived the specialist or GP to be. Findings from this study highlight the role of the bilingual GP in assisting CALD participants to understand information and to navigate their care pathways following CRC surgery.

The enablers, barriers and preferences of accessing radiation therapy facilities in the rural developed world - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Utilisation of radiation therapy for regional Australia and around the world has been the focus of much health policy the last decade. Radiation therapy centres have been built in Australian regional and rural areas to improve access to radiation therapy and reduce the tyranny of distance as a barrier to access. After this the enablers, barriers and perceptions of patients has been evaluated to determine utilisation once centres have been built. Thisreview looks the impact of rural radiation services in the developed world, barriers and enablers of establishing a rural radiation centre, and patients' and service providers' perspectives and preferences around the uptake of rural radiation therapy.

METHODS

Online search of peer reviewed literature was undertaken using MeSH terms relating to the topic. Inclusion criteria were regional radiation therapy centres in developing countries, any year of publication, in English, and qualitative or quantitative methodologies. Articles were reviewed by two authors with conflicts discussed with a third.

RESULTS

Twenty three studies addressed the theme directly. Distance barriers have been overcome by building regional centres and health economic burden was lower for government service providers with this strategy. However distance still plays an important role in influencing uptake of radiation therapy. Cultural expectations, influence of the family doctor and perception of care was influential. Carer support, duration of displacement from home, financial impact of the required care and seasonal weather were practical factors on a patient's decision.

CONCLUSIONS

Regional radiation therapy centres have improved access to radiation therapy in developing countries. However the complex nuances between socio-economic, cultural and health system factors that influence regional patient's decision making bears further consideration, as distance is not the only issue.

SCORE: Shared care of Colorectal cancer survivors: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common cancer affecting both men and women. Survivors of CRC often experience various physical and psychological effects arising from CRC and its treatment. These effects may last for many years and adversely affect QoL, and they may not be adequately addressed by standard specialist-based follow-up. Optimal management of these effects should harness the expertise of both primary care and specialist care. Shared models of care (involving both the patient’s primary care physician [PCP] and specialist) have the potential to better support survivors and enhance health system efficiency.

Methods/design

SCORE (Shared care of Colorectal cancer survivors) is a multisite randomised controlled trial designed to optimise and operationalise a shared care model for survivors of CRC, to evaluate the acceptability of the intervention and study processes, and to collect preliminary data regarding the effects of shared care compared with usual care on a range of patient-reported outcomes. The primary outcome is QoL measured using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are satisfaction with care, unmet needs, continuity of care and health resource use. The shared care model involves replacement of two routine specialist follow-up visits with PCP visits, as well as the provision of a tailored survivorship care plan and a survivorship booklet and DVD for CRC survivors. All consenting patients will be randomised 1:1 to either shared care or usual care and will complete questionnaires at three time points over a 12-month period (baseline and at 6 and 12 months). Health care resource use data will also be collected and used to evaluate costs.

Discussion

The evaluation and implementation of models of care that are responsive to the holistic needs of cancer survivors while reducing the burden on acute care settings is an international priority. Shared care between specialists and PCPs has the potential to enhance patient care and outcomes for CRC survivors while offering improvements in health care resource efficiency. If the findings of the present study show that the shared care intervention is acceptable and feasible for CRC survivors, the intervention may be readily expanded to other groups of cancer survivors.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000004369p. Registered on 3 January 2017; protocol version 4 approved 24 February 2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2245-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Identification of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cancer Patients in the Primary Health Care Setting

BACKGROUND

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians have poorer cancer outcomes and experience 30% higher mortality rates compared to non-Indigenous Australians. Primary health care (PHC) services are increasingly being recognized as pivotal in improving Indigenous cancer patient outcomes. It is currently unknown whether patient information systems and practices in PHC settings accurately record Indigenous and cancer status. Being able to identify Indigenous cancer patients accessing services in PHC settings is the first step in improving outcomes.

METHODS

Aboriginal Medical Centres, mainstream (non-Indigenous specific), and government-operated centers in Queensland were contacted and data were collected by telephone during the period from 2014 to 2016. Participants were asked to (i) identify the number of patients diagnosed with cancer attending the service in the previous year; (ii) identify the Indigenous status of these patients and if this information was available; and (iii) advise how this information was obtained.

RESULTS

Ten primary health care centers (PHCCs) across Queensland participated in this study. Four centers were located in regional areas, three in remote areas and three in major cities. All participating centers reported ability to identify Indigenous cancer patients attending their service and utilizing electronic Patient Care Information Systems (PCIS) to manage their records; however, not all centers were able to identify Indigenous cancer patients in this way. Indigenous cancer patients were identified by PHCCs using PCIS (n = 8), searching paper records (n = 1), and combination of PCIS and staff recall (n = 1). Six different types of PCIS were being utilized by participating centers. There was no standardized way to identify Indigenous cancer patients across centers. Health service information systems, search functions and capacities of systems, and staff skill in extracting data using PCIS varied between centers.

CONCLUSION

It is crucial to be able to easily identify Indigenous cancer patients accessing health services in the PHC setting to monitor progress, improve and evaluate care, and ultimately improve Indigenous cancer outcomes. It is also important for PHC staff to receive adequate training and support to utilize PCISs efficiently and effectively.

Primary Care Physicians' Perspectives of Their Role in Cancer Care: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

As survival rates improve, cancer is increasingly considered a chronic illness associated with significant long-term burden and sequelae, both physical and psychological. Various models of cancer care, including primary care physician (PCP)-led and shared-care, have been proposed, though a systematic review of PCPs' perspectives of their role and challenges in providing cancer care remains lacking. This systematic review summarises available literature on PCPs' perspectives of their role in cancer care.

METHODS

Five databases (MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL) were systematically searched using keywords and MeSH headings for articles from 1993-2015 exploring PCPs' views of their role in the care of patients/survivors of both child and adult cancers. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts for full-text review, abstracted data and performed a quality assessment.

RESULTS

Thirty-five articles representing the perspectives of 10,941 PCPs were captured. PCPs' confidence to provide care varied according to cancer phase (e.g. treatment versus survivorship), care domain (e.g. acute medical care versus psychological late effects), and disease prevalence (e.g. breast malignancies versus childhood cancers), with preferences for shared- versus independent-care models varying accordingly. Barriers included a lack of timely and specific information/communication from oncologists and limited knowledge/lack of guidelines, as well as lack of time, remuneration and patient trust.

LIMITATIONS

The data was limited by a lack of consideration of the preferences of patients and oncologists, leading to uncertainty about the acceptability and feasibility of suggested changes to cancer care.

DISCUSSION

PCPs appear willing to provide cancer care for patients/survivors; however, they report barriers and unmet needs related to providing such care. Future research/interventions should take into account the preferences and needs of PCPs.

The perceptions of Australian oncologists about cognitive changes in cancer survivors

OBJECTIVE

Cancer-related cognitive changes (CRCC) can have a profound impact on a cancer survivor's quality of life. However, cancer survivors frequently report receiving limited information about their experience of CRCC from their oncology specialists. This qualitative study aimed to explore the perceptions of oncology specialists regarding CRCC and the potential for their views to influence their decisions about patient care.

METHODS

Thirteen medical oncologists and five radiation oncologists currently practising in Australia participated in this study. Data collection involved individual semi-structured interviews via telephone. Data were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach.

RESULTS

Four key themes emerged: (1) beliefs about the impact of priming on cancer survivors' perceived cognitive function, (2) perceptions of who is more likely to raise concerns of cognitive change, (3) uncertainty of how to best manage CRCC, and (4) the perceived role of oncologists in the management of CRCC.

CONCLUSIONS

CRCC and its impact on the cancer survivor's journey have been under-addressed by oncology specialists, and they are uncertain of potential management strategies. With cancer survival rates increasing, there is a need for specific interventions and management guidelines addressing CRCC and their effects on cancer survivors. Future exploration should focus on the survivor as central to their care and holistic approaches to CRCC management involving all members of the multidisciplinary team.

Factors contributing to delayed diagnosis of cancer among Aboriginal people in Australia: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Delayed presentation of symptomatic cancer is associated with poorer survival. Aboriginal patients with cancer have higher rates of distant metastases at diagnosis compared with non-Aboriginal Australians. This paper examined factors contributing to delayed diagnosis of cancer among Aboriginal Australians from patient and service providers' perspectives.

METHODS

In-depth, open-ended interviews were conducted in two stages (2006-2007 and 2011). Inductive thematic analysis was assisted by use of NVivo looking around delays in presentation, diagnosis and referral for cancer.

PARTICIPANTS

Aboriginal patients with cancer/family members (n=30) and health service providers (n=62) were recruited from metropolitan Perth and six rural/remote regions of Western Australia.

RESULTS

Three broad themes of factors were identified: (1) Contextual factors such as intergenerational impact of colonisation and racism and socioeconomic deprivation have negatively impacted on Aboriginal Australians' trust of the healthcare professionals; (2) health service-related factors included low accessibility to health services, long waiting periods, inadequate numbers of Aboriginal professionals and high staff turnover; (3) patient appraisal of symptoms and decision-making, fear of cancer and denial of symptoms were key reasons patients procrastinated in seeking help. Elements of shame, embarrassment, shyness of seeing the doctor, psychological 'fear of the whole health system', attachment to the land and 'fear of leaving home' for cancer treatment in metropolitan cities were other deterrents for Aboriginal people. Manifestation of masculinity and the belief that 'health is women's domain' emerged as a reason why Aboriginal men were reluctant to receive health checks.

CONCLUSIONS

Solutions to improved Aboriginal cancer outcomes include focusing on the primary care sector encouraging general practitioners to be proactive to suspicion of symptoms with appropriate investigations to facilitate earlier diagnosis and the need to improve Aboriginal health literacy regarding cancer. Access to health services remains a critical problem affecting timely diagnosis.

Patients' perspectives on the role of their general practitioner after receiving an advanced cancer diagnosis

The aim of this study was to explore patients' perspectives on the role of their general practitioner (GP) after an advanced cancer diagnosis. A qualitative research approach was used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and data were analysed using a constant comparative methodology. Participants were eligible if they were diagnosed with advanced cancer and referred for palliative radiotherapy. Data saturation was achieved after 21 interviews. Key themes included (1) obtaining diagnosis and referral for advanced cancer treatment; (2) preference for specialist oncology care; (3) a preference for GP to act as an advocate; and (4) obtaining ongoing routine care from their GP. GP involvement in the patients' management was dependent on: time since diagnosis, GP's involvement in diagnosis and referral, doctor/patient relationship, additional chronic conditions requiring management, frequency of seeing oncologist and specialist recommendation to involve GP. Patients want GPs to have varying levels of involvement following an advanced cancer diagnosis. Not all communication between GPs and patients was positive suggesting communication skills training may be a priority. Patients wished to maintain continunity of care for their non-cancer related issues and healthcare of their family members. Future research needs to focus on working with GPs to increase their role in the management of advanced cancer.

Protocol for the ProCare Trial: a phase II randomised controlled trial of shared care for follow-up of men with prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Men with prostate cancer require long-term follow-up to monitor disease progression and manage common adverse physical and psychosocial consequences of treatment. There is growing recognition of the potential role of primary care in cancer follow-up. This paper describes the protocol for a phase II multisite randomised controlled trial of a novel model of shared care for the follow-up of men after completing treatment for low-moderate risk prostate cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The intervention is a shared care model of follow-up visits in the first 12 months after completing treatment for prostate cancer with the following specific components: a survivorship care plan, general practitioner (GP) management guidelines, register and recall systems, screening for distress and unmet needs and patient information resources. Eligible men will have completed surgery and/or radiotherapy for low-moderate risk prostate cancer within the previous 8 weeks and have a GP who consents to participate. Ninety men will be randomised to the intervention or current hospital follow-up care. Study outcome measures will be collected at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months and include anxiety, depression, unmet needs, prostate cancer-specific quality of life and satisfaction with care. Clinical processes and healthcare resource usage will also be measured. The principal emphasis of the analysis will be on obtaining estimates of the treatment effect size and assessing feasibility in order to inform the design of a subsequent phase III trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been granted by the University of Western Australia and from all hospital recruitment sites in Western Australia and Victoria.

RESULTS

of this phase II trial will be reported in peer-reviewed publications and in conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12610000938000.

Women's experiences of cognitive changes or 'chemobrain' following treatment for breast cancer: a role for occupational therapy?

BACKGROUND/AIM

Changes to functioning and cognition are commonly reported following chemotherapy. These changes are highly individual, and may not be fully recognised or understood. Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed in women worldwide, yet little is known about the impact of cognitive changes for these women following treatment and many do not benefit from occupational therapy services. The aim was to describe changes in cognitive function experienced by women who had undergone chemotherapy, and the strategies used to overcome the associated challenges.

METHOD

This was a qualitative phenomenological study conducted with nine women, aged between 39 and 67 years, from New South Wales. Participants were breast cancer survivors who had received chemotherapy treatment, and self-reported chemobrain symptoms. Data were collected through semi-structured in-depth telephone and face-to-face interviews. Data were transcribed, coded and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Six themes described the chemobrain experience for these women. They were: uncertainty about the origin of the chemobrain experience; persistent but inconsistent impacts on function; simple function turned complex; losing functional independence in family life; strategies to maintain function; and the need for recognition of the subjective experience of cancer treatment.

CONCLUSION

The experiences of cognitive and functional changes following chemotherapy for those reporting chemobrain symptoms are highly individual, and include the need for adaptive strategies. Some similarities in the types of impairments were experienced. As breast cancer survivorship rates continue to rise, there is a need for occupational therapy services to assist women in returning to daily occupations during or following their cancer treatment.

The impact of knowledge, attitudes and beliefs on the engagement of primary and community-based healthcare professionals in cancer care: a literature review

BACKGROUND

Primary health services are well placed to reinforce prevention, early intervention, and connected care. Despite this important role, primary care providers (PCPs) have a limited capacity to meet the varied needs of people with cancer and their carers - furthermore, the reasons for this largely remain unexplored.

SCOPE

To identify: (1) the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs held by health professionals and patients that can influence the engagement of PCPs with the early detection of cancer and follow-up care; (2) evidence that attitudes and beliefs can be modified with measureable impact on the engagement of PCPs with cancer care; and (3) potential targets for intervention. This was achieved through a review of English publications from 2000 onwards, sourced from six academic databases and complemented with a search for grey literature.

FINDINGS

A total of 4212 articles were reviewed to identify studies conducted in the UK, Canada, Holland (or The Netherlands), Australia, or New Zealand given the comparable role of PCPs. Several factors hinder PCP participation in cancer care, all of which are related to knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs. Patients and specialists are uncertain about the role that primary care could play and whether their primary care team has the necessary expertise. PCPs have varied opinions about the ideal content of follow-up programs. Study limitations include: the absence of well accepted definitions of key terms; the indexing systems used by databases to code publications, which may have obscured all relevant publications; the paucity of robust research; and possible researcher bias which was minimized through independent review by trained reviewers and the implementation of rigorous inter-rater reliability measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs influence PCP engagement in cancer care. It is important to develop shared understandings of these terms because the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of PCPs, specialists, patients, and their families can influence the effectiveness of treatment plans.

Cancer care coordinator: promoting multidisciplinary care--a pilot study in Australian general practice

AIM

We hypothesised that patients treated for breast cancer would benefit from targeted therapeutic action delivered by general practitioners on the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team based in primary care.

METHODS

Patients scheduled for follow-up visits at a hospital surgical clinic were invited to complete a self-administered care needs assessment and be interviewed by a breast care nurse. Members of the multidisciplinary team discussed the audio-recorded interviews within 2 weeks. The team made recommendations for each patient, which were presented to the general practitioner as a suggested 'care plan'. Health status information was collected via the Short Form 36 and Anxiety and Depression data via the Hospital anxiety and Depression Scale at recruitment and 3 months later.

RESULTS

Among the 74 women who were invited to participate, 21 were recruited over a 6-month period (28%), 19 of whom completed the study (90%). The mean age was 55 years (range 38-61 years) and the mean time in follow-up was 23 months (range 16-38 months). The team identified a median of three problems per patient (range 2-7) and made an average of two recommendations per patient for referral to an allied health professional (range 0-5). At 3 months, 17 women had attended their general practitioner, 11 of whom felt their condition had improved as a result of the intervention. There was no significant change in Short Form 36 or Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score after the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary care-based multidisciplinary review of treated breast cancer patients is feasible and, for most, results in benefit. However, only a minority of eligible patients participated in this pilot study and the logistics of organising the reviews warrants careful consideration.

The health of women treated for breast cancer: A challenge in primary care

At least one in a hundred consultations in general practice in Australia involves women being treated for breast cancer. The challenges presented during these consultations test the quality of primary care. Firstly, women are reported to prefer to discuss their breast cancer-related problems with a specialist even though research suggests that patients generally prefer to consult with a general practitioner (GP). The extent to which these patients will have maintained or return to their previous level of functioning will be a reflection on the quality of primary care, as some breast cancer-related health issues may persist beyond the time period when they are undergoing specialist review. Further, psychosocial matters, sexuality and relationships may require repeated review and perhaps consultations involving family members and would therefore be better addressed by a GP. An increasingly urgent need exists to review how best to support people who are successfully treated for life limiting illnesses, such as breast cancer.

Excess of health care use in general practice and of comorbid chronic conditions in cancer patients compared to controls

Background

The number of cancer patients and the number of patients surviving initial treatments is expected to rise. Traditionally, follow-up monitoring takes place in secondary care. The contribution of general practice is less visible and not clearly defined.

This study aimed to compare healthcare use in general practice of patients with cancer during the follow-up phase compared with patients without cancer. We also examined the influence of comorbid conditions on healthcare utilisation by these patients in general practice.

Methods

We compared health care use of N=8,703 cancer patients with an age and gender-matched control group of patients without cancer from the same practice. Data originate from the Netherlands Information Network of General Practice (LINH), a representative network consisting of 92 general practices with 350,000 enlisted patients. Health care utilisation was assessed using data on contacts with general practice, prescription and referral rates recorded between 1/1/2001 and 31/12/2007. The existence of additional comorbid chronic conditions (ICPC coded) was taken into account.

Results

Compared to matched controls, cancer patients had more contacts with their GP-practice (19.5 vs. 11.9, p<.01), more consultations with the GP (3.5 vs. 2.7, p<.01), more home visits (1.6 vs. 0.4, p<.01) and they got more medicines prescribed (18.7 vs. 11.6, p<.01) during the follow-up phase. Cancer patients more often had a chronic condition than their matched controls (52% vs. 44%, p<.01). Having a chronic condition increased health care use for both patients with and without cancer. Cancer patients with a comorbid condition had the highest health care use.

Conclusion

We found that cancer patients in the follow-up phase consulted general practice more often and suffered more often from comorbid chronic conditions, compared to patients without cancer. It is expected that the number of cancer patients will rise in the years to come and that primary health care professionals will be more involved in follow-up care. Care for comorbid chronic conditions, communication between specialists and GPs, and coordination of tasks then need special attention.

'Nowhere to room … nobody told them': logistical and cultural impediments to Aboriginal peoples' participation in cancer treatment

BACKGROUND

Cancer mortality among Indigenous Australians is higher compared to the non-Indigenous population and attributed to poor access to cancer detection, screening, treatment and support services. A large proportion of Indigenous Australians live in rural and remote areas which makes access to cancer treatment services more challenging. Factors, such as transport, accommodation, poor socio-economic status and cultural appropriateness of services also negatively affect health service access and, in turn, lead to poor cancer outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Qualitative research with 30 in-depth interviews was conducted with Aboriginal people affected by cancer from across WA, using a variety of recruitment approaches.

RESULTS

The infrastructure around the whole-of-treatment experience affected the decision-making and experiences of Aboriginal patients, particularly affecting rural residents. Issues raised included transport and accommodation problems, travel and service expenses, displacement from family, concerns about the hospital environment and lack of appropriate support persons. These factors are compounded by a range of disadvantages already experienced by Aboriginal Australians and are vital factors affecting treatment decision-making and access.

CONCLUSION

To improve cancer outcomes for Aboriginal people, logistical, infrastructure and cultural safety issues must be addressed. One way of ensuring this could be by dedicated support to better coordinate cancer diagnostic and treatment services with primary healthcare services.

Reaching further with online education? The development of an effective online program in palliative oncology

Patients in rural and remote Australia have less access to specialist oncology services and rely more on local health professionals for provision of cancer care. We have developed a 7.5-h online educational program on palliative oncology for health professionals focused on the needs of rural providers. There were 501 active (enrolled) users and 268 ad hoc (non-enrolled) users, with 90 completing evaluation. Eighty-two (91%) indicated that their learning needs were partially or entirely met. Sixty-five (75%) respondents planned to review or change their practice as a result. The online program is effective in meeting learning needs of Australian health providers, reaching high numbers with high acceptability.