4.6 Article

Follow-up care instructions, treatment summaries, and cancer survivors' receipt of follow-up health care and late/long term effects

Journal

SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER
Volume 23, Issue 7, Pages 1851-1856

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-014-2532-5

Keywords

Survivorship care plans; Follow-up instructions; Treatment summaries; Cancer survivorship; Cancer surveillance; Cancer screening; Late/long termeffects

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cancer survivors need follow-up care. Survivorship care plans (SCP), including follow-up care instructions (FCI) and treatment summaries (TS), were designed to improve cancer survivors' receipt of follow-up care after cancer treatment. However, there is a paucity of evidence regarding the relationship between survivors' receipt of FCI and TS and their receipt of follow-up care and late/long term effects. This study used data from the 2010 LIVESTRONG online survey of people affected by cancer, including 3541 cancer survivors who had completed treatment. Receipt of FCI was associated with greater likelihood of attendance at all regular medical appointments (aOR 2.28, 95 % CI 1.60-3.23), receipt of cancer surveillance (aOR 1.64, 95 % CI 1.28-2.09), being up to date on preventive cancer screening (aOR 2.63, 95 % CI 2.00-3.47), and with fewer late/long term effects (IRR 0.77, 95 % CI 0.69-0.85). Receipt of TS was associated with greater likelihood of attendance at all regular medical appointments (aOR 1.79, 95 % CI 1.31-2.44) and being up to date on preventive cancer screening (aOR 1.43, 95 % CI 1.14-1.78), but not cancer surveillance or late/long term effects. This study is among the first to document the associations between SCP and survivors' attendance at regular medical appointments, cancer surveillance, preventive cancer screenings, and late/long term effects. The findings suggest that SCP may facilitate follow-up care needed by cancer survivors after cancer treatment is completed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available