Breast cancer follow up: A randomised controlled trial comparing point of need access versus routine 6-monthly clinical review

Sheppard, Carmel; Higgins, Bernard; Wise, M.; Yiangou, C.; Dubois, Dominique; Kilburn, Sally

doi:10.1016/j.ejon.2008.11.005

Cited by 61 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

113

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In breast cancer, recent trials have compared traditional follow-up with alternatives, including their acceptability and satisfaction to patients, their impact on quality of life, and any lack of disadvantage in detection of recurrence [28,29]. Giving patients the option to initiate their own contact with specialist nurses based on self-assessed need is a growing trend [29,30,34,39,44].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Giving patients the option to initiate their own contact with specialist nurses based on self-assessed need is a growing trend [29,30,34,39,44]. In the main, there is high satisfaction with patient-led follow-up by low to moderate risk breast cancer survivors, as long as they are confident to assess their own symptoms, have a clear indication of their future risk profile, receive annual mammographic surveillance, and are provided with a safe, reliable, and quick route back to specialist care if needed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sheppard et al [29] conducted an RCT (n =237) comparing 'point of need access' (patient-initiated) versus routine 6-monthly clinical review [31]. Both groups continued to have annual access to routine mammography.…”

Section: Evidence In the Literaturementioning

confidence: 96%

“…It will be important to confirm whether there is an increased use of services after such interventions and if this represents appropriate use of rehabilitative and supportive care or over-use. Sheppard et al [29] Breast cancer (n=237) Point of need (patient-initiated) access compared to routine 6-monthly clinical reviews.…”

Section: Evidence In the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Towards a personalised approach to aftercare: a review of cancer follow-up in the UK

Davies

Batehup

2011

J Cancer Surviv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evidence In the Literaturementioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Evidence In the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Towards a personalised approach to aftercare: a review of cancer follow-up in the UK

Davies

Batehup

2011

J Cancer Surviv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of these purposes, the early detection of new primary cancer or locoregional recurrence help improve the survival rate, but the diagnosis of distant metastasis is known to have no advantage in survival rate or health-related quality of life (QoL) [4,5]. Also, randomized controlled trials have found that reduced follow-up strategies did not negatively affect patient outcomes or early detection of recurrence, and more intensive follow-up was associated with higher costs without differences in early detection of relapses [6,7]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The reality in the follow-up of breast cancer survivors: survey of Korean Breast Cancer Society

Kim¹,

Kim

Shim

et al. 2015

Ann Surg Treat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeFollow-up after primary treatment for breast cancer is an important component of survivor care and various international guidelines exist for the surveillance. However, little is known about current actual practice patterns of physicians whether they adhere to or deviate from recommended guidelines. The aim of this study was to determine how physicians follow-up their patients after primary treatment for breast cancer in Korea.MethodsA questionnaire survey with 34 questions in 4 categories was e-mailed to the members of Korean Breast Cancer Society from November to December 2013. Respondents were asked how they use follow-up modalities after primary treatment of breast cancer and we compared the survey results with present guidelines.ResultsOf the 129 respondents, 123 (95.3%) were breast surgeons. The most important consideration in follow-up was tumor stage. History taking, physical examinations, and mammography were conducted in similar frequency recommended by other guidelines while breast ultrasonography was performed more often. The advanced imaging studies such as CT, MRI, and bone scan, which had been recommended to be conducted only if necessary, were also examined more frequently. Regular screenings for secondary malignancy were performed in 38 respondents (29.5%). Five years later after primary treatment, almost the whole respondents (94.6%) themselves monitored their patients.ConclusionA majority of respondents have been performed more intensive follow-up modalities in comparison with present guidelines and less frequently screenings for secondary malignancy. For optimal follow-up of breast cancer survivors, tailored delivery system should be considered.

show abstract

Specialist breast care nurses for support of women with breast cancer

Brown

Cruickshank

Noblet

2021

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Breast cancer follow up: A randomised controlled trial comparing point of need access versus routine 6-monthly clinical review

Cited by 61 publications

References 17 publications

Towards a personalised approach to aftercare: a review of cancer follow-up in the UK

Towards a personalised approach to aftercare: a review of cancer follow-up in the UK

The reality in the follow-up of breast cancer survivors: survey of Korean Breast Cancer Society

Specialist breast care nurses for support of women with breast cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About