Views of cancer care reviews in primary care: a qualitative study
Views of cancer care reviews in primary care: a qualitative study
Background
The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) provides an incentive for practices to establish a cancer register and conduct a review with cancer patients within 6 months of diagnosis, but implementation is unknown.
Aim
To describe: (1) implementation of the QOF cancer care review; (2) patients' experiences of primary care over the first 3 years following a cancer diagnosis; (3) patients' views on optimal care; and (4) the views of primary care professionals regarding their cancer care.
Design of study
Qualitative study using thematic analysis and a framework approach.
Setting
Six general practices in the Thames Valley area.
Method
Semi-structured interviews with cancer patients and focus groups with primary care teams.
Results
Thirty-eight adults with 12 different cancer types were interviewed. Seventy-one primary care team members took part in focus groups. Most cancer care reviews are conducted opportunistically. Thirty-five patients had had a review; only two could recall this. Patients saw acknowledgement of their diagnosis and provision of general support as important and not always adequately provided. An active approach and specific review appointment would legitimise the raising of concerns. Primary care teams considered cancer care to be part of their role. GPs emphasised the importance of being able to respond to individual patients' needs and closer links with secondary care to facilitate a more involved role.
Conclusion
Patients and primary care teams believe primary care has an important role to play in cancer care. Cancer care reviews in their current format are not helpful, with considerable scope for improving practice in this area. An invitation to attend a specific appointment at the end of active treatment may aid transition from secondary care and improve satisfaction with follow-up in primary care.
e173-e182
Adams, Eike
6e497017-41e8-4773-b0c9-438b3bb44901
Boulton, Mary
92b1dcba-36f3-49f9-959f-1d1af4576afd
Rose, Peter
5df71431-cc13-43ac-86da-8f26fa607b33
Lund, Susi
239a4d54-13e1-4d69-8e3f-08475c20af47
Richardson, Alison
3db30680-aa47-43a5-b54d-62d10ece17b7
Wilson, Sue
6fd6c8e9-2e06-4eff-a081-feecf4d173ae
Watson, Eila
d295228d-d534-4c35-844f-ca8471c169c0
April 2011
Adams, Eike
6e497017-41e8-4773-b0c9-438b3bb44901
Boulton, Mary
92b1dcba-36f3-49f9-959f-1d1af4576afd
Rose, Peter
5df71431-cc13-43ac-86da-8f26fa607b33
Lund, Susi
239a4d54-13e1-4d69-8e3f-08475c20af47
Richardson, Alison
3db30680-aa47-43a5-b54d-62d10ece17b7
Wilson, Sue
6fd6c8e9-2e06-4eff-a081-feecf4d173ae
Watson, Eila
d295228d-d534-4c35-844f-ca8471c169c0
Adams, Eike, Boulton, Mary, Rose, Peter, Lund, Susi, Richardson, Alison, Wilson, Sue and Watson, Eila
(2011)
Views of cancer care reviews in primary care: a qualitative study.
British Journal of General Practice, 61 (585), .
(doi:10.3399/bjgp11x567108).
(PMID:21439175)
Abstract
Background
The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) provides an incentive for practices to establish a cancer register and conduct a review with cancer patients within 6 months of diagnosis, but implementation is unknown.
Aim
To describe: (1) implementation of the QOF cancer care review; (2) patients' experiences of primary care over the first 3 years following a cancer diagnosis; (3) patients' views on optimal care; and (4) the views of primary care professionals regarding their cancer care.
Design of study
Qualitative study using thematic analysis and a framework approach.
Setting
Six general practices in the Thames Valley area.
Method
Semi-structured interviews with cancer patients and focus groups with primary care teams.
Results
Thirty-eight adults with 12 different cancer types were interviewed. Seventy-one primary care team members took part in focus groups. Most cancer care reviews are conducted opportunistically. Thirty-five patients had had a review; only two could recall this. Patients saw acknowledgement of their diagnosis and provision of general support as important and not always adequately provided. An active approach and specific review appointment would legitimise the raising of concerns. Primary care teams considered cancer care to be part of their role. GPs emphasised the importance of being able to respond to individual patients' needs and closer links with secondary care to facilitate a more involved role.
Conclusion
Patients and primary care teams believe primary care has an important role to play in cancer care. Cancer care reviews in their current format are not helpful, with considerable scope for improving practice in this area. An invitation to attend a specific appointment at the end of active treatment may aid transition from secondary care and improve satisfaction with follow-up in primary care.
Text
Adams_Views_of_cancer_care_reviews_BJGP_2011.pdf
- Author's Original
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy
More information
Published date: April 2011
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 179493
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/179493
ISSN: 0960-1643
PURE UUID: 77dffe72-5596-440c-909c-fd95cea94421
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 28 Apr 2011 15:51
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 02:55
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Eike Adams
Author:
Mary Boulton
Author:
Peter Rose
Author:
Susi Lund
Author:
Sue Wilson
Author:
Eila Watson
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics