ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2012
Continuity of care of colorectal cancer survivors at the end of treatment: the oncology-primary care interface.
Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-gastrointestinal symptom burden following colorectal cancer treatment-a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Factors influencing the translation of shared cancer follow-up care into clinical practice: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- Documenting patients' and providers' preferences when proposing a randomized controlled trial: a qualitative exploration.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Trial
- Content validity of patient-reported measures evaluating experiences of the quality of transitions in healthcare settings-a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Discharging the complex patient - changing our focus to patients' networks of care providers.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Canadian Resources, Programs, and Models of Care to Support Cancer Survivors' Transition beyond Treatment: A Scoping Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- Factors related to satisfaction of cancer patients with transfer arrangements made by university hospitals at the end-of-life in Japan: a cross-sectional questionnaire survey of bereaved family members.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Article
- Associations between shared care and patient experiences among older cancer survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2021Article
- Moving forward after cancer: successful implementation of a colorectal cancer patient-centered transitions program.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2020Article
- Improving continuity by bringing the cancer patient, general practitioner and oncologist together in a shared video-based consultation - protocol for a randomised controlled trial.BMC family practice · 2019Article
- The supportive care needs of women experiencing gynaecological cancer: a Western Australian cross-sectional study.BMC cancer · 2018Article
- Perceptions of shared care among survivors of colorectal cancer from non-English-speaking and English-speaking backgrounds: a qualitative study.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Alberta CancerBridges development of a care plan evaluation measure.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2018Article
- The role of family physicians in cancer care: perspectives of primary and specialty care providers.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2017Article
- The experiences of cancer survivors while transitioning from tertiary to primary care.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2016Article
- Patients' experiences with continuity of cancer care in Canada: Results from the CanIMPACT study.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016Article
- A Formative Study of Colon Cancer Surveillance Care: Implications for Survivor-Centered Interventions.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2015Article
- Do patients with long-term side effects of cancer treatment benefit from general practitioner support? A literature review.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study examines at a population level how colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors evaluate the continuity and quality of their follow-up care after treatment, particularly for those in the care of a primary care provider (PCP).
methodsA survey was mailed in 2010 to all individuals in Manitoba, Canada diagnosed in 2008/2009 with stage II and III CRC. Respondents were asked to identify the main provider(s) of their follow-up care. Those indicating a PCP completed the Patient Continuity of Care Questionnaire (PCCQ), which assesses continuity of care upon discharge from hospital to community. Quality of life (QOL) on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy--Colorectal (FACT-C) and the Illness Intrusiveness Rating Scale was collected as well as demographic information. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were utilized.
resultsThe response rate was 246/360 or 68.3 %. Most participants were Caucasian with a mean age of 70 and 18 months from diagnosis. A single "main provider" of follow-up care was named by 47 %, most frequently a FP or oncologist, but a majority (53 %) indicated multiple providers. Twenty-four combinations of providers were described. The 106 respondents (43.1 %) who named a PCP as a main provider completed the PCCQ and reported high scores on its five subscales. In multivariate analysis, lower FACT-C QOL scores (OR 2.72, CI 1.12-6.57) and male gender (OR 2.82, CI 1.11-7.18) predicted poorer evaluations of continuity of care. Concern was highest regarding sexual function, body image, fatigue, impact on work and recreation, and bowel control, and in those who were younger or with rectal cancer.
conclusionsThe organization of CRC follow-up care between providers is complex and variable, but patients followed by PCPs evaluate their transitions of care after treatment favorably. Specific clinical issues and higher risk groups are identified and may benefit from specific attention from all providers. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Most CRC survivors are satisfied when their primary care provider becomes responsible for follow-up care. However, this is less true for those who are having more challenges in recovery. These survivors should ensure that information transfer and support services are identified that will smooth this transition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.