nach oben

Wiener klinische Wochenschrift

Erschienen in:

Open Access 17.10.2017 | original article

Patients’ view of routine follow-up after breast cancer treatment

verfasst von: Vesna Bjelic-Radisic, MD, Martha Dorfer, Karl Tamussino, Elfriede Greimel

Erschienen in: Wiener klinische Wochenschrift | Ausgabe 21-22/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Summary

Background

To assess emotional distress, anxiety and stress reactions in breast cancer (BC) patients before the follow-up visits.

Study design

Between September 2009 and December 2011 a total of 284 patients completed the BC-psychosocial assessment screening scale (PASS) and a questionnaire about their views of follow-up after treatment for BC.

Results

Of the patients 64% reported low level of distress on the BC-PASS. The mean scores on the physical well-being scale was 5.3, the satisfaction/sense of coherence scale 7.4, and the emotional distress scale 8.1. Women rated mammography as the most important component (71%), followed by breast ultrasound (63%) and the consultation with the physician (60%). Of the patients 94% were satisfied with the current follow-up regimen.

Conclusions

In this series BC patients were satisfied with their aftercare. Mammography was thought to be the most important component of aftercare. Patient-reported outcomes should be taken into account when planning follow-up.

Vorheriger Artikel HPV prevalence in vulvar cancer in Austria

Nächster Artikel Molecular epidemiology of multidrug-resistant clinical isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii

Rojas MPMP, Telaro E, Moschetti I, Moschetti I, Fossati R, Liberati A, Rosselli MDT. Follow-up strategies for women treated for early breast cancer (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005; https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001768.pub2.PubMed

NCCN Guidelines Version 2. 2015; Sub-Committees Survivorship

Khatcheressian JL, Hurley P, Bantug E, Esserman LJ, Grunfeld E, Halberg F, Hantel A, LynnHenry N, Muss HB, Smith T, Vogel VG, Wolff AC, Somerfiled MR, Davidson NE. Breast cancer follow-up and management after primary treatment: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(7):961–5.CrossRefPubMed

Kimman ML, Voogd AC, Dirksen CD, Falger P, Hupperets P, Keymeulen K, Hebly M, Dehing C, Lambin P, Boersma LJ. Improving the quality and efficiency of follow-up after curative treatment for breast cancer—rationale and study design of the MaCare trial. BMC Cancer. 2007; https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-7-1.PubMedPubMedCentral

Liberati A, GIVIO Investigators. The GIVIO trial on the impact of follow-up care on survival and quality of life in breast cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 1995;2:S41–S5.CrossRef

Smith TJ, Davidson NE, Schapira DV, Grunfeld E, Muss HB, Vogel VG, Somerfield MR. American Society of Clinical Oncology 1998 update of recommended breast cancer surveillance guidelines. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(3):1080–2.CrossRefPubMed

Aguiar-Bujanda D, Bohn-Sarmiento U, Aguiar-Morales J. False elevation of serum CA 15-3 levels in patients under follow-up for breast cancer. Breast J. 2004;10(4):375–6.CrossRefPubMed

Collins RF, Bekker HL, Dodwell DJ. Follow-up care of patients treated for breast cancer:a structured review. Cancer Treat Rev. 2004;30:19–35.CrossRefPubMed

Lewis RA, Neal RD, Williams NH, France B, Hendry M, Russell D, Hudges DA, Russel I, Stuart NS, Weller D, Wilkinson C. Follow-up of cancer in primary care versus secondary care: systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2009;59(564):e234–e47.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Beaver K, Luker K. Follow-up in breast cancer clinics: reassuring for patients rather than detecting recurrence. Psychooncology. 2005;14:94–101.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Bradley EJ, Pitts M, Redman CWF, Calvert E. The experience of long-term hospital follow-up for women who have suffered early stage gynecological cancer: a qualitative interview study. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1999;9:491–6.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Allen A. The meaning of the breast cancer follow up experience for the women who attend. Eur J Oncol Nur. 2002;6:155–61.CrossRef

13.

Auchincloss SS. After treatment. Psychosocial isues in gynecologic cancer survivorship. Cancer. 1995;76:2117–24.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Koinberg I, Holmberg I, Fridlund B. Satisfaction with routine follow-up visits to the physician-the needs of patients with breast cancer. Acta Oncol. 1995;40:454–9.CrossRef

15.

Lewis RA, Neal RD, Hendry M, France B, Williams NH, Russell D, Hudges DA, Russell I, Stuart NSA, Weller D, Wilkinson C. Patients and healthcare professionals views of cancer follow-up: systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2009;59:e248–e59.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Watson EK, Rose PW, Neal RD, Hulbert-Williams N, Donnelly P, Hubbard G, Elliot J, Campbell C, Weller D, Wilkinson C. Personalized cancer follow-up risk stratification, needs assessment or both? Br J Cancer. 2012;106:1–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Dewar J, Kerr G. Value of routine follow-up of women treated for early carcinoma of the breast. BMJ. 1985;291:1464–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Dewar J. Follow up in breast cancer: a suitable case for reappraisal. BMJ. 1995;310:685–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Werheimer M. Against minimalism in breast cancer follow-up. JAMA. 1991;265:396–7.CrossRef

20.

Isermann M, Diegelmann C, Kaiser W, Priebe S. The BC-PASS (Breast Cancer Psychological Assessment Screening Scale). In: Ditz S, Diegelmann C, Isermann M, editors. Psychoonkologie – Schwerpunkt Brustkrebs. Ein Handbuch für die aerztliche und psychotherapeutische Praxis. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer; 2006.

21.

Diehl JM, Staufenbiel T. Statistik mit SPSS für Windows Version 6.1. Frankfurt: Klotz; 1997.

22.

Montazeri A. Health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: a bibliographic review of the literature from 1974 to 2007. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2008;27:32.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Schapira DV. Breast cancer surveillance:– a cost-effective strategy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1993;25:107–11.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Jacobs HJ, van Dijck JA, de Kleijn EM, Kiemeney LA, Verbeek AL. Routine follow up examination in breast cancer patients have minimal impact on life expectancy. A simulation study. Ann Oncol. 2001;12:1107–13.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Grunfeld E, Levine MN, Julian JA, Coyle D, Szechtman B, Mirsky D, Verma S, Dent S, Sawka C, Pritchard KI, Ginsburg D, Wood M, Whelan T. Randomized trial of long-term follow-up for early-stage breast cancer: a comparison of family physician vesus specialist care. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(6):848–55.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Lis ChG, Rodeghier M, Gupta D. Distribution and determinants of patient satisfaction in oncology: a review of the literature. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2009;3:287–304.PubMedPubMedCentral

27.

McClement SE, Hack TF. Audio-taping the oncology treatment consultation: a literature review. Patient Educ Couns. 1999;36:229–38.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Stefanek ME, Derogatis LP, Shaw A. Psychological distress among oncology outpatients. Prevalence and severity as measured with the brief symotim inventory. Psychosomatics. 1987;28:530–9.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Von Gruenigen VE, Hutchins JR, Reidy AM, Gibbons HE, Daly BJ, Eldermire EM, Fusco NL. Gynecologic oncology patients satisfaction and symptom severity during palliative chemotherapy. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:84.CrossRef

Titel: Patients’ view of routine follow-up after breast cancer treatment
verfasst von: Vesna Bjelic-Radisic, MD
Martha Dorfer
Karl Tamussino
Elfriede Greimel
Publikationsdatum: 17.10.2017
Verlag: Springer Vienna
Erschienen in: Wiener klinische Wochenschrift / Ausgabe 21-22/2017
Print ISSN: 0043-5325
Elektronische ISSN: 1613-7671
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-017-1278-8

Medical error and patient safety in the spotlight

letter to the editors

Charlson Comorbidity Index, inappropriate medication use and cognitive impairment

Original Article

General practitioners in Styria – who is willing to take part in research projects and why?

Open Access
original article

Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in otherwise healthy individuals between the ages of 18 and 90 years in southeast Turkey

letter to the editors

Facial nerve palsy secondary to Epstein–Barr virus infection of the middle ear in pediatric population may be more common than we think

short report

Sex and gender matters

Open Access
original article

Springer Medizin Österreich

Patients’ view of routine follow-up after breast cancer treatment

Summary

Background

Study design

Results

Conclusions

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 21-22/2017

Medical error and patient safety in the spotlight

Charlson Comorbidity Index, inappropriate medication use and cognitive impairment

General practitioners in Styria – who is willing to take part in research projects and why?

Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in otherwise healthy individuals between the ages of 18 and 90 years in southeast Turkey

Facial nerve palsy secondary to Epstein–Barr virus infection of the middle ear in pediatric population may be more common than we think

Sex and gender matters

Springer Medizin Österreich

Summary

Background

Study design

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Medical error and patient safety in the spotlight

Charlson Comorbidity Index, inappropriate medication use and cognitive impairment

General practitioners in Styria – who is willing to take part in research projects and why?

Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in otherwise healthy individuals between the ages of 18 and 90 years in southeast Turkey

Facial nerve palsy secondary to Epstein–Barr virus infection of the middle ear in pediatric population may be more common than we think

Sex and gender matters