A health economic evaluation of follow-up after breast cancer surgery: Results of an rct study

Acta Oncologica

Volumn 48, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 99-104

  Koinberg, Ingalill ^a,b,f   Engholm, G B ^c   Genell, A ^b   Holmberg, L ^d,e  

^a KRISTIANSTAD UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b SAHLGRENSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^c ÖREBRO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^d UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^e KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^f VARBERG HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ANXIETY; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST MINIMIZATION ANALYSIS; DEPRESSION; ECONOMIC ASPECT; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; LABORATORY TEST; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

APPOINTMENTS AND SCHEDULES; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; NURSE CLINICIANS; PHYSICIANS;

EID: 58149100214     PISSN: 0284186X     EISSN: 1651226X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02841860802314712     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Parkin D, Fernàndez LM. Use of statistics to assess the global burden of breast cancer. Breast J 2006;12:70-80.
2. Kimman ML, Voggd AC, Dirksen CD, Falger P, Hupperets P, Keymeulen K, et al. Follow-up after curative treatment for breast cancer: Why do we still adhere to frequent outpatient clinic visits? Eur J Cancer 2007;43:647-53.
3. Kokko R, Hakama M, Holli K. Follow-up cost of breast cancer patients with localized disease after primary treatment: A randomized trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005;93:255-60.
4. Hensley ML, Dowell J, Herndon JE, Winer E, Stark N, Weeks JC, et al. Economic outcomes of breast cancer survivorship: CALGB study 79804. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005;91:153-61.
5. Bosanquet N, Sikora K. The economics of cancer care in the UK. Lancet Oncol 2004;5:568-74.
6. Grunfeld E, Fitzpatrick R, Mant D, Yudkin P, Adewuyi-Dalton R, Stewart J, et al. Comparison of breast cancer patient satisfaction with follow-up in a primary care versus specialist care: Result from a randomised controlled trial. Br J Gen Pract 1999;49:705-10.
7. Brown L, Payne S, Royle G. Patient initiated follow-up of breast cancer. Psycho-oncology 2002;11:346-55.
8. Rojas MP, Telaro E, Russo A, Moschetti I, Coe L, Fossati R, et al. Follow-up strategies for women treated for early breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005.
9. McArdle JM, George WD,McArdle CS, Smith DC, Moodie AR, Hughson AV, et al. Psychosocial support for patients undergoing breast cancer surgery: A randomised study. Br Med J 1996;30:813-6.
10. Koinberg I, Fridlund B, Engholm G-B, Holmberg L. Nurse-led follow-up on demand or by a physician after breast cancer surgery: A randomised study. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2004; 8:109-17.
11. Arving C, Sjöden PO, Bergh J, Hellbom M, Johansson B, Glimelius B, et al. Individual psychosocial support for breast cancer patients: A randomized study of nurse versus psychologist interventions and standard care. Cancer Nursing 2007;30:E10-9.
12. Kimman ML, Voggd AC, Dirksen CD, Falger P, Hupperets P, Keymeulen K, et al. Improving the quality and efficiency of follow-up after curative treatment for breast cancer-rationale and study design of the MaCare trial. Eur J Cancer 2007;7:1.
13. Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddard GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publication; 1997.
14. Sobin Wittekind CH. TNM classification of malignant tumours, 5th ed. New York: Wiley-Liss; 2002.
15. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1996.
16. Briggs AH. Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics 2000;17:479-500.
17. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman & Hall/CRC; 1993.
18. Brennan A, Akehurst R. Modelling in health economic evaluation - What is its Place? What is its Value? Pharmacoeconomics 2000;17:445-59.
19. Canty A, Ripley B. Boot: Bootstrap R (S-Plus) Functions (Canty). 2006 R package version 1.2-26. 〈cantya@mcmaster.ca〉, 〈ripley@stats.ox. ac.uk〉
20. R Development Core Team (2007). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http:www.R-project.org.
21. Lidgren M, Wilking N, Jönsson B, Rehnberg C. Resource use and costs associated with different states of breast cancer. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2007;23:223-31.
22. Cancer Incidence in Sweden 2005. The National Board of Health and Welfare, Stockholm. www.socialstyrelsen.se
23. Helgesen F, Andersson S-O, Gustafsson O, Varenhorst E, Gobén B, Carnock S, et al. Follow-up of prostate cancer patients by on-demand contacts with a specialist nurse: A randomised study. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2000;34:55-61.
24. Radice D, Redaelli A. Breast cancer management: Quality-of-life and cost consideration. Pharmaeconomics 2003;21:383-96.
25. Sikora K, Bosanguet N. Cancer care in the United Kingdom: New solutions are needed. Br Med J 2003;327:1044-6.