Professionals’ and patients’ views of routine follow-up: a questionnaire survey

Abstract

Traditionally, women who have been treated for a gynecological cancer have undergone long-term follow-up by hospital doctors. Recently, there has been interest in alternative models of follow-up, including nurse-based review. The project compares patients' and professionals' views of follow-up. A questionnaire was completed by 96 women attending routine follow-up clinics and by 32 professionals involved in delivering follow-up. A large majority of women (82/96, 92%) and professionals (25/34, 73%) thought that follow-up should be provided by a hospital doctor. However, professionals were more likely to think that specialist nurses and general practitioners should be involved in the provision of follow-up (P < 0.01). Professionals thought that the most important part of the follow-up visit was the consultation, whereas women thought it was the examination (P < 0.001). Women thought that detection of recurrence was the most important reason for continuing surveillance, whereas professionals regarded addressing patients' concerns as the primary reason for follow-up (P < 0.001). We conclude that the views of women undergoing follow-up after gynecological cancer differ significantly from the professionals providing follow-up care. These views must be considered when developing alternative follow-up strategies.

Nurse led telephone follow up in ovarian cancer: A psychosocial perspective

“…Health care professionals currently overestimate the psychological benefits of traditional gynaecological follow up for their patients (Kew et al 2007) and guidelines are urgently required to improve the psychosocial support offered to these women. A recent study by Cox and colleagues (Cox et al 2006a) examined the information needs and experiences of UK cancer patients, including a sample of 67 patients with gynaecological cancer.…”

Gynaecological cancer follow-up: national survey of current practice in the UK

“…Furthermore, knowledge of recurrence, whether treatable or not, appears to be useful to patients30 and information should be provided to detail the scope and limitations of follow-up 3. Rapid access to oncological assessment at recurrence may be more important than offering frequent routine appointments 14 31.…”

The value of serum CA125 for the development of virtual follow-up strategies for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a retrospective study

“…Patients accept inconvenience, costs and physical discomfort associated with regular physical examinations hoping that recurrent disease is detected at an early stage when the tumour load is small and still amenable for curative treatment [15,16]. In contrast, clinicians feel that physical examinations are unlikely to result in survival benefits for patients [8].…”

“…In contrast, clinicians feel that physical examinations are unlikely to result in survival benefits for patients [8]. Health care professionals' expectations to follow up include the monitoring of symptoms associated with previous treatment or relapse [15,16] and quality assurance.…”