Family physician involvement in cancer care and lung cancer patient emotional distress and quality of life

Interprofessional follow-up of patients with cancer in France (the SINPATIC study): a preliminary, qualitative study of the patient's perspective

BACKGROUND

In 2020, 19.2 million people were diagnosed with cancer, and nearly 10 million cancer patients died worldwide. An effective cancer care pathway must be based on coordination, multidisciplinarity, a personalized approach, and collaboration between stakeholders. Follow-up can be improved by good collaboration and communication between GPs and the cancer care team at a common level of organization.

OBJECTIVES

To study patients with solid cancers and assess their perceptions of the care pathway, the roles of the healthcare professionals involved, and interprofessional collaboration.

METHODS

In a preliminary, qualitative study (part of the SINPATIC study of general practitioners, oncologists, nurses, and patients), adult patients with cancer in the Paris area of France were interviewed between January and April 2018. Using purposive sampling, 10 patients were recruited from hospital departments and primary care. An interview guide explored 3 themes: the care pathway, the stakeholders' roles in follow-up, and interprofessional collaboration.

RESULTS

For patients, dealing with cancer is a complex process of awareness, care provision, decision-making, task assignment, a lack of clarification of professional roles, a piecemeal announcement of the diagnosis of cancer by several stakeholders, organizational and administrative difficulties, non-formal collaboration in inertia (tending towards collaboration under construction), and with cancer follow-up that was usually parallel, sometimes shared, rarely sequential.

CONCLUSION

This SINPATIC substudy provided us a better understanding of the complexity of the patient care pathway. Looking forward, the present findings might stimulate thoughts on the design and development of interventional studies.

Patients' acceptance of a shared cancer follow-up model of care between general practitioners and radiation oncologists: A population-based survey using the theoretical Framework of Acceptability

INTRODUCTION

International and national guidelines highlight the need for general practitioner involvement during and after active cancer treatment and throughout long-term follow-up care. This paper aimed to evaluate patients' acceptance of radiation oncology shared follow-up care using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA).

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted at two cancer care centres in the Illawarra Shoalhaven region of Australia. A sample of patients scheduled for a radiation oncology follow-up consultation in 2021 were sent a 32-point self-complete paper-based survey. Data were analysed using descriptive, parametric and non-parametric statistical analysis. This paper followed the Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS).

RESULTS

Of the 414 surveys returned (45% response rate), the acceptance for radiation oncology shared cancer follow-up care was high (80%). Patients treated with only radiotherapy were 1.7 times more likely to accept shared follow-up care than those treated with multiple modalities. Patients who preferred follow-up care for fewer than three years were 7.5 times more likely to accept shared care than those who preferred follow-up care for five years. Patients who travelled more than 20 minutes to their radiation oncologist or to the rural cancer centre were slightly more likely to accept shared care than those who travelled less than twenty minutes to the regional cancer centre. A high understanding of shared care (Intervention Coherence) and a positive feeling towards shared care (Affective Attitude) were significant predictive factors in accepting shared radiation oncology follow-up care.

CONCLUSION

Health services need to ensure patient preferences are considered to provide patient-centred cancer follow-up care. Shared cancer follow-up care implementation should start with patients who prefer a shorter follow-up period and understand the benefits of shared care. However, patients' involvement needs to be considered alongside other clinical risk profiles and organisational factors. Future qualitative research using the TFA constructs is warranted to inform clinical practice change.

Family doctor contract services and health-related quality of life among patients with chronic diseases in rural China: what is the role of socioeconomic status?

Purpose

Few studies explored the relationship between the family doctor contract services (FDCS) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among patients with chronic diseases in rural China. This study aims to explore the relationship between the status of signing on FDCS and HRQOL among patients with chronic diseases and examine whether there are differences in the relationship between different socioeconomic status (SES).

Methods

A total of 1,210 respondents were included in this study. HRQOL was measured by EQ-5D-3L. The contracting status was divided into uncontracted and contracted. Tobit regression and Logistic regression were employed to explore the association between contracting status and HRQOL. The interaction terms were included to explore the differences in the association among different SES.

Results

Contracting with family doctors was associated with HRQOL (coefficient = 0.042; 95%CI 0.008 to 0.075). The association was different among different socioeconomic levels that the contracting status was only associated with HRQOL in sub-high-income (P < 0.01) and highly educated patients (P < 0.05). Compared with uncontracted patients, contracted patients reported higher ED-5D-3L utility value in the sub-high-income group (coefficient = 0.078; 95%CI 0.017 to 0.140) and high educational attainment (coefficient = 0.266; 95%CI 0.119 to 0.413).

Conclusions

This study found a significant association between FDCS and HRQOL among chronic patients in rural Shandong, China. This relationship varied by income levels and educational attainment. The government should take efforts to formulate a variety of measures to encourage chronic patients to contract with family doctors, with special attention to people with low SES.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12939-021-01530-2.

Continuity of Cancer Care and Collaboration Between Family Physicians and Oncologists: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

Collaboration between family physicians (FPs) and oncologists can be challenging. We present the results of a randomized clinical trial of an intervention designed to improve continuity of care and interprofessional collaboration, as perceived by patients with lung cancer and their FPs.

METHODS

The intervention included (1) supplying FPs with standardized summaries related to each patient, (2) recommending that patients see their FP after receiving the cancer diagnosis, (3) supplying the oncology team with patient information resulting from FP visits, and (4) providing patients with priority access to FPs as needed. A total of 206 patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer were randomly assigned to the intervention (n = 104) or control group (n = 102), and 86.4% of involved FPs participated. Perceptions of continuity of care and interprofessional collaboration were assessed every 3 months for patients and at baseline and at the end of the study for FPs. Patient distress and health service utilization were also assessed.

RESULTS

Patients and FPs in the intervention group perceived better interprofessional collaboration (patients: P <.0001; FPs: P = .0006) than those in the control group. Patients reported better informational continuity (P = .001) and management continuity (P = .05) compared to the control group, but no differences were found for FPs (information: P = .22; management: P = .13). No effect was found with regard to patient distress or health service utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

This intervention improved patient and FP perception of interprofessional collaboration, but its effectiveness on continuity of care was less clear for FPs than for patients. Additional strategies should be considered to sustainably improve continuity of care and interprofessional collaboration.

The effects of family physician-contracted service on health-related quality of life and equity in health in China

Background

Family physician-contracted service (FPCs) has been recently implemented in Chinese primary care settings. This study was aimed at measuring the effects of FPCs on residents’ health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and equity in health among the Chinese population.

Methods

The study data was drawn from the 2018 household health survey (Shaanxi Province, China) using multistage, stratified cluster random sampling. We measured HRQoL using EQ-5D-3L based on the Chinese-specific time trade-off values set. Coarsened exact matching (CEM) technique was used to control for confounding factors between residents with and without a contracted family physician. The concentration index (C) was calculated to measure equity in health.

Results

Individuals with a contracted family physician had significantly higher HRQoL than those without, after data matching (0.9355 vs. 0.8995; P <  0.001). Additionally, the inequity in HRQoL among respondents with a contracted family physician was significantly lower than those without a contracted family physician (Cs of EQ-5D utility score: 0.0084 vs. 0.0263; p <  0.001).

Conclusions

This study highlights the positive effects of FPCs on HRQoL and socioeconomic-related equity in HRQoL. Future efforts should prioritize the economically and educationally disadvantaged groups, the expansion of service coverage, and the competency of family physician teams to further enhance health outcome and equity in health.