Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Cancer Survivorship
Published in: Journal of Cancer Survivorship 6/2023

Open Access 06-09-2022 | Care | Review

What is the evidence behind cancer care reviews, a primary care cancer support tool? A scoping review

Authors: Dipesh P. Gopal, Tahania Ahmad, Nikolaos Efstathiou, Ping Guo, Stephanie J. C. Taylor

Published in: Journal of Cancer Survivorship | Issue 6/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

A “cancer care review” (CCR) is a conversation between a patient recently diagnosed with cancer and primary care practitioner soon after a diagnosis of cancer in the UK. This scoping review aimed to identify: methodology and validated outcome measures used to evaluate CCRs, the impact of CCRs on quality of life or symptoms, and the views of patients, their carers and healthcare professionals on CCRs.

Methods

A scoping review was performed and five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar) were searched systematically from January 2000 to March 2022.

Results

Of 4133 articles, ten met the inclusion criteria. These included surveys, qualitative research on stakeholders’ views and a small study evaluating group consultation CCRs. There were no studies on methodology to evaluate CCRs or the impact of CCRs on patient quality of life or symptoms. Some primary care professionals felt CCRs were a tick-box exercise, and that they had inadequate time to deliver care, compounded by inadequate primary-secondary care coordination and lack of expertise which was echoed by patients. Interviews with patients found few recalled CCRs and those that recalled CCRs did, did not find them particularly helpful. Partners of patients would welcome CCRs to raise personal health concerns and remain updated on patient care.

Conclusions

Further studies should identify the role that stakeholders believe they should have in CCRs, improve care coordination between primary care and secondary care and how to support caregivers.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

There is currently insufficient evidence to support the use of CCRs in general practice.
Literature
1.
2.
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Collaboration GBoDC, Kocarnik JM, Compton K, Dean FE, Fu W, Gaw BL, et al. Cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life years for 29 cancer groups from 2010 to 2019: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019. JAMA Oncol. 2022;8(3):420–44.CrossRef
4.
Ahmad AS, Ormiston-Smith N, Sasieni PD. Trends in the lifetime risk of developing cancer in Great Britain: comparison of risk for those born from 1930 to 1960. Br J Cancer. 2015;112(5):943–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Adams E, Boulton M, Rose P, Lund S, Richardson A, Wilson S, et al. Views of cancer care reviews in primary care: a qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract. 2011;61(585):173–82.PubMedCrossRef
12.
13.
Johnston L, Young J, Campbell K. The implementation and impact of Holistic Needs Assessments for people affected by cancer: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of the literature. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2019;28(3):e13087.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Corsini N, Neylon K, Tian EJ, Mahpirof E, McLaughlin A, McLeod S, et al. Impact of treatment summaries for cancer survivors: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv. 2020;14(4):405–16.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Hill RE, Wakefield CE, Cohn RJ, Fardell JE, Brierley M-EE, Kothe E, et al. Survivorship care plans in cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review of care plan outcomes. Oncologist. 2020;25(2):e351–72.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):143.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.CrossRef
18.
Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Tricco AC, Pollock D, Munn Z, Alexander L, et al. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synth. 2020;18(10):2119–26.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.PubMedCrossRef
20.
21.
Berkowitz C, Allen DH, Tenhover J, Zullig LL, Ragsdale J 3rd, Fischer JE, et al. Knowledge and preferences of primary care providers in delivering head and neck cancer survivorship care. J Cancer Educ. 2017;33:132–1327.
22.
Peters MDJ, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(3):141–6.PubMedCrossRef
23.
24.
25.
Bradbury-Jones C, Aveyard H, Herber OR, Isham L, Taylor J, O’Malley L. Scoping reviews: the PAGER framework for improving the quality of reporting. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2022;25(4):457–470CrossRef
26.
Watson EK, Sugden EM, Rose PW. Views of primary care physicians and oncologists on cancer follow-up initiatives in primary care: an online survey. J Cancer Surviv. 2010;4(2):159–66.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Adams E, Boulton M, Rose PW, Lund S, Richardson A, Wilson S, et al. A qualitative study exploring the experience of the partners of cancer survivors and their views on the role of primary care. Support Care Cancer. 2012;20(11):2785–94.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Walter FM, Usher-Smith JA, Yadlapalli S, Watson E. Caring for people living with, and beyond, cancer: an online survey of GPs in England. Br J Gen Pract. 2015;65(640):e761–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
30.
Beaver K, Martin-Hirsch P, Williamson S, Kyrgiou M. Exploring the acceptability and feasibility of patient-initiated follow-up for women treated for stage I endometrial cancer. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2020;44:101704.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Williamson S, Beaver K, Langton S. Exploring health care professionals views on alternative approaches to cancer follow-up and barriers and facilitators to implementation of a recovery package. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2020;46:101759.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Dyer S, Dewhurst S. Why general practice nurses need education about cancer as a long-term condition. Primary Health Care. 2020;30(1):16–22.
33.
Kendall M, Mason B, Momen N, Barclay S, Munday D, Lovick R, et al. Proactive cancer care in primary care: a mixed-methods study. Fam Pract. 2013;30(3):302–12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
34.
Hodgson E. Group consultations for cancer care reviews in general practice. Pract Nurs. 2020;31(4):170–2.CrossRef
35.
Lange M, Joly F, Vardy J, Ahles T, Dubois M, Tron L, et al. Cancer-related cognitive impairment: an update on state of the art, detection, and management strategies in cancer survivors. Ann Oncol. 2019;30(12):1925–40.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Wells M, Semple CJ, Lane C. A national survey of healthcare professionals’ views on models of follow-up, holistic needs assessment and survivorship care for patients with head and neck cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2015;24(6):873–83.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Williamson S, Hack TF, Bangee M, Benedetto V, Beaver K. The patient needs assessment in cancer care: identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation in the UK and Canada. Support Care Cancer. 2021;29(2):805–12.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Beesley VL, Staneva A, Nehill C, Milch V, Hughes F, Webb PM. Patterns of, and barriers to supportive care needs assessment and provision for Australian women with gynecological cancer and their caregivers: a mixed-methods study of clinical practice. Palliat Support Care. 2020;18(2):170–7.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Hewitt ME, Bamundo A, Day R, Harvey C. Perspectives on post-treatment cancer care: qualitative research with survivors, nurses, and physicians. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(16):2270–3.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Dulko D, Pace CM, Dittus KL, Sprague BL, Pollack LA, Hawkins NA, et al. Barriers and facilitators to implementing cancer survivorship care plans. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2013;40(6):575–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
41.
LaGrandeur W, Armin J, Howe CL, Ali-Akbarian L. Survivorship care plan outcomes for primary care physicians, cancer survivors, and systems: a scoping review. J Cancer Surviv. 2018;12(3):334–47.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Smith SL, Wai ES, Alexander C, Singh-Carlson S. Caring for survivors of breast cancer: perspective of the primary care physician. Curr Oncol. 2011;18(5):e218–26.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
43.
Merport A, Lemon SC, Nyambose J, Prout MN. The use of cancer treatment summaries and care plans among Massachusetts physicians. Support Care Cancer. 2012;20(7):1579–83.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Meiklejohn JA, Mimery A, Martin JH, Bailie R, Garvey G, Walpole ET, et al. The role of the GP in follow-up cancer care: a systematic literature review. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10(6):990–1011.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Deckx L, Chow KH, Askew D, van Driel ML, Mitchell GK, van den Akker M. Psychosocial care for cancer survivors: a systematic literature review on the role of general practitioners. Psychooncology. 2021;30(4):444–54.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Chan RJ, Agbejule OA, Yates PM, Emery J, Jefford M, Koczwara B, Hart NH, Crichton M, Nekhlyudov L. Outcomes of cancer survivorship education and training for primary care providers: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv. 2022;16(2):279–302.
47.
Taylor S, Johnson H, Peat S, Booker J, Yorke J. Exploring the experiences of patients, general practitioners and oncologists of prostate cancer follow-up: a qualitative interview study. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2020;48:101820.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
48.
Cromme SK, Whitaker KL, Winstanley K, Renzi C, Smith CF, Wardle J. Worrying about wasting GP time as a barrier to help-seeking: a community-based, qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract. 2016;66(648):e474–82.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Vos JAM, Wieldraaijer T, van Weert HCPM, van Asselt KM. Survivorship care for cancer patients in primary versus secondary care: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv. 2021;15(1):66–76.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Zafar SY, Peppercorn JM, Schrag D, Taylor DH, Goetzinger AM, Zhong X, et al. The financial toxicity of cancer treatment: a pilot study assessing out-of-pocket expenses and the insured cancer patient’s experience. Oncologist. 2013;18(4):381–90.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
Webb ME, Murray E, Younger ZW, Goodfellow H, Ross J. The supportive care needs of cancer patients: a systematic review. J Cancer Educ. 2021;36(5):899–908.CrossRef
52.
Essue BM, Iragorri N, Fitzgerald N, de Oliveira C. The psychosocial cost burden of cancer: a systematic literature review. Psychooncology. 2020;29(11):1746–60.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
53.
Ullgren H, Tsitsi T, Papastavrou E, Charalambous A. How family caregivers of cancer patients manage symptoms at home: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018;85:68–79.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Cai Y, Simons A, Toland S, Zhang J, Zheng K. Informal caregivers’ quality of life and management strategies following the transformation of their cancer caregiving role: a qualitative systematic review. Int J Nurs Sci. 2021;8(2):227–36.PubMedPubMedCentral
55.
Möllerberg MLSA, Lithman T, Noreen D, Olsson H, Sjövall K. The effects of a cancer diagnosis on the health of a patient’s partner: a population-based registry study of cancer in Sweden. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2016;25(5):744–52.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Nakaya N, Sone T, Tomata Y, Nakaya K, Hoshi M, Shimizu K, et al. All-cause mortality among Japanese whose cohabiting partners are diagnosed with cancer: the Ohsaki Cohort 2006 study. Acta Oncol. 2019;58(4):425–31.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Samuelsson M, Wennick A, Jakobsson J, Bengtsson M. Models of support to family members during the trajectory of cancer: a scoping review. J Clin Nurs. 2021;30(21–22):3072–98.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Treanor CJ, Santin O, Prue G, Coleman H, Cardwell CR, O’Halloran P, et al. Psychosocial interventions for informal caregivers of people living with cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;6(6):CD009912.PubMed
59.
Cheng Q, Xu B, Ng MSN, Duan Y, So WKW. Effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions among caregivers of patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2021;127:104162.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Ugalde A, Gaskin CJ, Rankin NM, Schofield P, Boltong A, Aranda S, et al. A systematic review of cancer caregiver interventions: appraising the potential for implementation of evidence into practice. Psychooncology. 2019;28(4):687–701.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
61.
Li Y, Li J, Zhang Y, Ding Y, Hu X. The effectiveness of e-Health interventions on caregiver burden, depression, and quality of life in informal caregivers of patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Nurs Stud. 2022;127:104179.PubMedCrossRef
62.
63.
64.
Murphy M, Scott LJ, Salisbury C, Turner A, Scott A, Denholm R, et al. Implementation of remote consulting in UK primary care following the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods longitudinal study. Br J Gen Pract. 2021;71(704):e166–77.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
65.
Marczak J, Fernandez JL, Manthorpe J, Brimblecombe N, Moriarty J, Knapp M, et al. How have the Care Act 2014 ambitions to support carers translated into local practice? Findings from a process evaluation study of local stakeholders’ perceptions of Care Act implementation. Health Soc Care Community. 2011. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​hsc.​13599.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
What is the evidence behind cancer care reviews, a primary care cancer support tool? A scoping review
Authors
Dipesh P. Gopal
Tahania Ahmad
Nikolaos Efstathiou
Ping Guo
Stephanie J. C. Taylor
Publication date
06-09-2022
Publisher
Springer US
Keyword
Care
Published in
Journal of Cancer Survivorship / Issue 6/2023
Print ISSN: 1932-2259
Electronic ISSN: 1932-2267
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-022-01251-7

Other articles of this Issue 6/2023

Journal of Cancer Survivorship 6/2023 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Treating persistent pain after breast cancer: practice gaps and future directions

Review

Racial disparities in treatment-related cardiovascular toxicities amongst women with breast cancer: a scoping review

OriginalPaper

Financial burdens during the COVID-19 pandemic are related to disrupted healthcare utilization among survivors of adolescent and young adult cancers

OriginalPaper

Long-term changes of cognitive impairment among older breast cancer survivors

OriginalPaper

The long-term financial experiences of adolescent and young adult cancer survivors

OriginalPaper

Out-of-pocket payments and loss of income among long-term breast cancer survivors in Germany: a multi-regional population-based study
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits