Do cancer patients benefit from short-term contact with a general practitioner following cancer treatment? A randomised, controlled study

Supportive Care in Cancer

Volumn 13, Issue 11, 2005, Pages 949-956

  Holtedahl, Knut ^a   Norum, Jan ^b   Anvik, Tor ^a   Richardsen, Elin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TROMSØ   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF NORTH NORWAY   (Norway)

Author keywords

Cancer follow up; Family medicine; General practice; Quality of life; Supportive care

Indexed keywords

CYTOSTATIC AGENT; HORMONE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER HORMONE THERAPY; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONSULTATION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NORWAY; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RELATIVE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

AGED; CONTINUITY OF PATIENT CARE; FAMILY PRACTICE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS; NORWAY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 27144508043     PISSN: 09414355     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-005-0869-5     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Aaraas I, Førde OJ, Kristiansen IS, Melbye H (1998) Do general practitoner hospitals reduce the utilisation of general hospital beds? Evidence from Finnmark county in north Norway. J Epidemiol Community Health 52:243-246
2. Aaronson N, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez J et al. for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Study Group on Quality of Life et al (1993) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:365-376
3. Baker R, Preston C, Cheater F, Hearnshaw H (1999) Measuring patients' attitudes to care across the primary/secondary interface: the development of the patient career diary. Qual Health Care 8:154-160
4. Cheater FM, Preston C, Wynn A, Hearnshaw H, Baker R (1999) Patients' views of cancer services: development of a questionnaire for accreditation. Eur J Oncol Nurs 3:72-82
5. Grunfeld E, Fitzpatrick R, Mant D, Yudkin P, Adewuyi-Dalton R, Stewart J, Cole D, Vessey M (1999) Comparison of breast cancer patient satisfaction with follow-up in primary care versus specialist care: results from a randomized controlled trial. Br J Gen Pract 49:705-710
6. Grunfeld E, Mant D, Yudkin P, Adewuyi-Dalton R, Cole D, Stewart J, Fitzpatrick R, Vessey M (1996) Routine follow-up of breast cancer in primary care: randomised trial. BMJ 313:665-669
7. Kattlove H, Winn RJ (2003) Ongoing care of patients after primary treatment for their cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 53:172-196
8. Nielsen JD, Palshof T, Mainz J, Jensen AB, Olesen F (2003) Randomised controlled trial of a shared care programme for newly referred cancer patients: bridging the gap between general practice and hospital. Qual Saf Health Care 12:263-272
9. Norman A, Sisler J, Hack T, Harlos M (2001) Family physicians and cancer care. Palliative care patients' perspectives. Can Fam Physician 47:2009-2016
10. Ringdal G, Ringdal K (1993) Testing the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire on cancer patients with heterogenous diagnoses. Qual Life Res 2:129-140
11. Smith SM, Campbell NC (2004) Provision of oncology services in remote rural areas: a Scottish perspective. Eur J Cancer Care 13:185-192
12. Tattersall MHN, Thomas H (1999) Recent advances: oncology. BMJ 318:445-448
13. Zitzelsberger L, Grunfeld E, Graham ID (2004) Family physicians' perspectives on practice guidelines related to cancer control. BMC Fam Pract 5:25