Cost-effectiveness and quality of life in surgeon versus general practitioner-organised colon cancer surveillance: A randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2013, Pages

  Augestad, Knut Magne ^a,b   Norum, Jan ^b,c   Dehof, Stefan ^d   Aspevik, Ranveig ^d   Ringberg, Unni ^e   Nestvold, Torunn ^f   Vonen, Barthold ^b,f   Skrøvseth, Stein Olav ^a   Lindsetmo, Rolv Ole ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF NORTH NORWAY   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TROMSØ   (Norway)

^c NORTHERN NORWAY REGIONAL HEALTH AUTHORITY   (Norway)

^d Helgeland Hospital   (Norway)

^e Nordbyen Primary Care Office   (Norway)

^f NORDLAND HOSPITAL   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER SURGERY; COLON CANCER; COLONOSCOPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR RESEARCH AND TREATMENT OF CANCER QOL QUESTIONNAIRE; EUROQOL 5D; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; METASTASIS; METASTASIS RESECTION; MULTICENTER STUDY; MULTIMODALITY CANCER THERAPY; NAMED INVENTORIES, QUESTIONNAIRES AND RATING SCALES; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SURGEON; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

EID: 84877776230     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002391     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Larsen IK. Cancer in Norway 2009. Oslo, Norway: Cancer Registry of Norway, 2011:1-169.
2. Jeffery M, Hickey BE, Hider PN. Follow-up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002200.pub2
3. Tjandra JJ, Chan MKY. Follow-up after curative resection of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 2007;50:1783-99.
4. Figueredo A, Rumble RB, Maroun J, et al. Follow-up of patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer: a practice guideline. BMC Cancer 2003;3:26.
5. Cairns SR, Scholefield JH, Steele RJ, et al. Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in moderate and high risk groups (update from 2002). Gut 2010;59:666e690. doi:10.1136/gut.2009.179804
6. Bülow S. Retningslinier for diagnostik og behandling af kolorektal cancer (Danish Guidelines). Danish Colorectal Cancer Group, 2009;4:1-176.
7. Vonen B. Nasjonalt handlingsprogram med retningslinjer for diagnostikk, behandling og oppfølging av kreft i tynntarm og endetarm (Norwegian Guidelines). Norwegian Gastrointestinal Cancer Group NGICG, 2010:1-162.
8. Engstrom PF. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology colon cancer V.2.2009. National Comprehensive Cancer network, 2009;2:1-71. www.nccn.org
9. Follow-up study of patients who have undergone surgery for stage I, stage II, or stage III colorectal cancer. clinicaltrials.gov. 2009:1-4.
10. Grossmann EM, Johnson FE, Virgo KS, et al. Follow-up of colorectal cancer patients after resection with curative intent - the GILDA trial. Surg Oncol 2004;13:119-24.
11. Wille-Jørgensen P, Laurberg S, Carriquiry L, et al. An interim analysis of recruitment to the COLOFOL trial. Colorect Dis 2009;11:756-8.
12. Wille-Jørgensen P, Balleby L. Follow-up in colorectal cancer: questions to be answered. Colorectal Dis 2011;13:959-60.
13. Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. JAMA 2002;288:1775-9.
14. National Cancer Survivor Initiative. Department of Health, Macmillan Cancer Support and NHS Improvement, London, UK, 2010;1-82.
15. Augestad KM, Vonen B, Aspevik R, et al. Should the surgeon or the general practitioner (GP) follow up patients after surgery for colon cancer? A randomized controlled trial protocol focusing on quality of life, cost-effectiveness and serious clinical events. BMC Health Serv Res 2008;8:137.
16. Campbell NC. Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ 2007;334:455-9.
17. Kawamoto K. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ 2005;330:765-70.
18. Sprangers MA, Cull A, Bjordal K, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Approach to quality of life assessment: guidelines for developing questionnaire modules. EORTC study group on quality of life. Qual Life Res 1993;2:287-95.
19. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997;35:1095-108.
20. Dolan P. The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ 2006;5:1-14.
21. Cambell M. Estimating sample sizes for binary, ordered categorical, and continuous outcomes in two group comparisons. BMJ 1995;311:1145-7.
22. King M. The interpretation of scores from the EORTC quality of life questionnaire QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res 2004;5:555-67.
23. Drummond M. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. BMJ 1996;313:275-83.
24. Drummond M, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. New York: Oxford University Press Inc, 2005.
25. Desgagné A, Castilloux A, Angers J, et al. The use of the bootstrap statistical method for the pharmacoeconomic cost analysis of skewed data. Pharmacoeconomics 1998;13:487-97.
26. Hill JC, Whitehurst D, Lewis M, et al. Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2011;378:1560-71.
27. Lachin JM. Futility interim monitoring with control of type I and II error probabilities using the interim Z-value or confidence limit. Clin Trials 2009;6:565-73.
28. Lachin JM. A review of methods for futility stopping based on conditional power. Stat Med 2005;24:2747-64.
29. Jitlal M, Khan I, Lee SM, et al. Stopping clinical trials early for futility: retrospective analysis of several randomised clinical studies. Br J Cancer 2012;107:910-17.
30. Wattchow DA, Weller DP, Esterman A, et al. General practice vs surgical-based follow-up for patients with colon cancer: randomised controlled trial. Br J Cancer 2006;94:1116-21.
31. Renehan AG, O'Dwyer ST, Whynes DK. Cost effectiveness analysis of intensive versus conventional follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer. BMJ 2004;328:1-5.
32. Gall CA, Weller D, Esterman A, et al. Patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life after treatment for colon cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2007;50:801-9.
33. Körner H, Søreide K, Stokkeland PJ, et al. Systematic follow-up after curative surgery for colorectal cancer in Norway: a population-based audit of effectiveness, costs, and compliance. J Gastroint Surg 2005;9:320-8.
34. Körner H, Søreide K, Stokkeland PJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of serum-carcinoembryonic antigen in recurrent colorectal cancer: a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2006;14:417-23.
35. Søreide K, Traeland JH, Stokkeland PJ, et al. Adherence to national guidelines for surveillance after curative resection of nonmetastatic colon and rectum cancer: a survey among Norwegian gastrointestinal surgeons. Colorectal Dis 2012;14:320-4.
36. Beaver K, Hollingworth W, McDonald R, et al. Economic evaluation of a randomized clinical trial of hospital versustelephone follow-up after treatment for breast cancer. Br J Surg 2009;96:1406-15.
37. Grunfeld E. Follow-up of breast cancer in primary care vs specialist care: results of an economic evaluation. Br J Cancer 1999;79:1227-33.
38. Kimman ML, Dirksen CD, Voogd AC, et al. Economic evaluation of four follow-up strategies after curative treatment for breast cancer: results of an RCT. Eur J Cancer 2011;47:1175-85.
39. Grunfeld E. Randomized trial of long-term follow-up for early-stage breast cancer: a comparison of family physician versus specialist care. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:848-55.
40. Editorial. Cancer detection and primary care revisited. Lancet Oncol 2012;13:559.
41. Rubin G, Lyratzopoulos G, Abel G, et al. Cancer detection in primary care. Lancet Oncol 2012;13:e325-6.
42. Lyratzopoulos G, Neal R, Barbiere J, et al. Variation in number of general practitioner consultations before hospital referral for cancer: findings from the 2010 national cancer patient experience survey in England. Lancet Oncol 2012;13:353-65.
43. Cooper G, Kou T, Reynolds H. Receipt of guideline-recommended follow-up in older colorectal cancer survivors. Cancer 2008;113:2029-37.
44. Drummond M, Barbieri M, Cook J, et al. Transferability of economic evaluations across jurisdictions: ISPOR good research practices task force report. Value Health 2009;12:409-18.
45. Grunfeld E. Routine follow up of breast cancer in primary care: randomised trial. BMJ 1996;313:665-9.
46. Smith RA. Mathematical models and cost-effective screening strategies for colorectal cancer. CMAJ 2010;182:1283-4.