General practitioners’ attitudes toward follow-up after cancer treatment: A cross-sectional questionnaire study

Abstract

Objective An increasing number of cancer patients place a significant workload on hospital outpatient clinics, and health authorities are considering alternative follow-up regimens. It has been suggested that follow-up of cancer patients could be provided by GPs. This study aimed to explore GPs’ experiences with the provision of follow-up care for cancer patients, and their views on assuming greater responsibility in the future.Design Electronic questionnaire study.Subjects GPs in seven regions in Norway.Results A total of 317 GPs responded. Many GPs reported experience in providing follow-up care to cancer patients, during the years following initial diagnosis primarily in collaboration with hospital specialists. More than half of the GPs were satisfied with their collaboration. Most GPs preferred to be involved at an early stage in follow-up care and, generally, GPs felt confident in their skills to provide this type of service. Fewer than 10% were willing to assume responsibility for additional cancer patients, citing potentially increased workload as the main reason.Conclusions GPs acknowledged the importance of providing follow-up care to cancer patients, and the majority felt confident in their own ability to provide such care. However, they were hesitant to assume greater responsibility primarily due to fears of increased workload.Key PointsIt has been suggested that follow-up of cancer patients can be provided by general practitioners (GPs). The viewpoints and attitudes of GPs regarding such follow-up were investigated.GPs reported broad experience in providing follow-up care to patients after active cancer treatment.GPs acknowledged the importance of follow-up care, and they felt confident in their own ability to provide such care.Fewer than 10% of GPs were willing to assume responsibility for additional cancer patients, citing potentially increased workload as the main reason.

Gynecological cancer patients’ attitudes toward follow‐up care after cancer treatment: Do preferences reflect patients’ experience? A cross‐sectional questionnaire study

“…[12][13][14]21,22 However, according to previous studies, not only do GPs feel competent to provide this kind of follow-up care, they regard themselves as better suited than specialists to provide psychosocial support to cancer patients. 5,23 Contrary to our findings, cross-sectional studies of patients with breast, prostate and melanoma cancer have shown that these patients prefer to see their GP for psychosocial matters and general care. 13,24,25 The patients in our study thought that the main reason for attending follow-up is to detect possible recurrence, which is in line with most previous studies.…”

“…The preference of a specialist may also be founded on a belief that GPs have limited abilities to perform cancer‐specific follow‐up care . However, according to previous studies, not only do GPs feel competent to provide this kind of follow‐up care, they regard themselves as better suited than specialists to provide psychosocial support to cancer patients . Contrary to our findings, cross‐sectional studies of patients with breast, prostate and melanoma cancer have shown that these patients prefer to see their GP for psychosocial matters and general care .…”

Post-diagnosis skin cancer follow-up in rural general practice: A mixed-method study

“…15 Studies have variously used questionnaires and surveys to explore patients' and GPs' perspectives on follow-up care of cancer in primary care. [16][17][18][19] Murchie et al conducted semi-structured interviews to understand the practical experiences of GPs in GP-led melanoma follow-up. 11 In our study, we used a survey to collect information about skin cancer follow-up practices in regional Victoria and explore the challenges in the follow-up, and interviews to collect in-depth information about the practices and challenges.…”

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

“…18 19 The results of an Australian randomised control trial examining integrated care with hospitals and general practitioners (GPs) for patients with prostate cancer also demonstrated that this was a safe and acceptable model of care at lower cost to the healthcare system. 20 GPs feel confident and enabled to contribute to long-term cancer care 21 and cancer survivors are satisfied with care delivery in primary care. 22 There have been a number of studies examining follow-up of lung cancer in different settings.…”

“…26 The potential shift in the care for patient with cancer with greater GP involvement also raises concerns that GP workloads may be increased. 21 There is additional concern that perhaps GPs will see very few of these cases in their practice and thus may not be adequately confident or have sufficient experience to safely follow-up these patients. 15 27 The proposed solution in this situation would be the use of a protocol in conjunction with clinical acumen to guide follow-up.…”