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.
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.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Journal of Cancer Survivorship Research and Practice |
| Early online date | 6 Sept 2022 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 6 Sept 2022 |
Keywords
- Cancer
- Cancer care reviews
- Cancer survivorship
- Living with and beyond cancer
- Primary care
- Scoping review
