Search

Aim: Following treatment for colorectal cancer it is common practice for patients to attend hospital clinics at regular intervals for routine monitoring, although debate persists on the benefits of this approach. Nurse-led telephone follow-up is effective in meeting information and psycho-social needs in other patient groups. We explored the potential benefits of nurse-led telephone follow-up for colorectal cancer patients. Method: Sixty-five patients were randomised to either telephone or hospital follow-up in an exploratory randomised trial. Results: The telephone intervention was deliverable in clinical practice and acceptable to patients and health professionals. Seventy-five percent of eligible patients agreed to randomization. High levels of satisfaction were evident in both study groups. Appointments in the hospital group were shorter (median 14.0 minutes) than appointments in the telephone group (median 28.9 minutes). Patients in the telephone arm were more likely to raise concerns during consultations. Conclusion: Historical approaches to follow-up unsupported by evidence of effectiveness and efficiency are not sustainable. Telephone follow-up by specialist nurses may be a feasible option. A main trial comparing hospital and telephone follow-up is justified although consideration needs to be given to trial design and practical issues related to the availability of specialist nurses at study locations.

Aim: Following treatment for colorectal cancer it is common practice for patients to attend hospital clinics at regular intervals for routine monitoring, although debate persists on the benefits of this approach. Nurse-led telephone follow-up is effective in meeting information and psycho-social needs in other patient groups. We explored the potential benefits of nurse-led telephone follow-up for colorectal cancer patients. Method: Sixty-five patients were randomised to either telephone or hospital follow-up in an exploratory randomised trial. Results: The telephone intervention was deliverable in clinical practice and acceptable to patients and health professionals. Seventy-five percent of eligible patients agreed to randomization. High levels of satisfaction were evident in both study groups. Appointments in the hospital group were shorter (median 14.0 minutes) than appointments in the telephone group (median 28.9 minutes). Patients in the telephone arm were more likely to raise concerns during consultations. Conclusion: Historical approaches to follow-up unsupported by evidence of effectiveness and efficiency are not sustainable. Telephone follow-up by specialist nurses may be a feasible option. A main trial comparing hospital and telephone follow-up is justified although consideration needs to be given to trial design and practical issues related to the availability of specialist nurses at study locations.

Aim: Following treatment for colorectal cancer it is common practice for patients to attend hospital clinics at regular intervals for routine monitoring, although debate persists on the benefits of this approach. Nurse-led telephone follow-up is effective in meeting information and psycho-social needs in other patient groups. We explored the potential benefits of nurse-led telephone follow-up for colorectal cancer patients. Method: Sixty-five patients were randomised to either telephone or hospital follow-up in an exploratory randomised trial. Results: The telephone intervention was deliverable in clinical practice and acceptable to patients and health professionals. Seventy-five percent of eligible patients agreed to randomization. High levels of satisfaction were evident in both study groups. Appointments in the hospital group were shorter (median 14.0 minutes) than appointments in the telephone group (median 28.9 minutes). Patients in the telephone arm were more likely to raise concerns during consultations. Conclusion: Historical approaches to follow-up unsupported by evidence of effectiveness and efficiency are not sustainable. Telephone follow-up by specialist nurses may be a feasible option. A main trial comparing hospital and telephone follow-up is justified although consideration needs to be given to trial design and practical issues related to the availability of specialist nurses at study locations.

Aim: Following treatment for colorectal cancer it is common practice for patients to attend hospital clinics at regular intervals for routine monitoring, although debate persists on the benefits of this approach. Nurse-led telephone follow-up is effective in meeting information and psycho-social needs in other patient groups. We explored the potential benefits of nurse-led telephone follow-up for colorectal cancer patients. Method: Sixty-five patients were randomised to either telephone or hospital follow-up in an exploratory randomised trial. Results: The telephone intervention was deliverable in clinical practice and acceptable to patients and health professionals. Seventy-five percent of eligible patients agreed to randomization. High levels of satisfaction were evident in both study groups. Appointments in the hospital group were shorter (median 14.0 minutes) than appointments in the telephone group (median 28.9 minutes). Patients in the telephone arm were more likely to raise concerns during consultations. Conclusion: Historical approaches to follow-up unsupported by evidence of effectiveness and efficiency are not sustainable. Telephone follow-up by specialist nurses may be a feasible option. A main trial comparing hospital and telephone follow-up is justified although consideration needs to be given to trial design and practical issues related to the availability of specialist nurses at study locations.

Purpose To explore patient satisfaction on different aspects of follow-up service provision following treatment for colorectal cancer and amenability to an alternative strategy for follow-up care. Methods and sample A postal survey was administered to 297 eligible patients who had been treated for colorectal cancer at a large hospital in the North West of England. Patients were asked to indicate responses to questions comprising likert scales, including views on organisation of care, information and advice, personal experience of care, satisfaction with information and care, views on specialist nursing services and amenability to telephone follow-up. Key results One hundred and eighty-seven completed surveys were returned (62.97% response rate). Analysis of scale data indicated high levels of satisfaction on all outcome measures but sub-optimal rates of satisfaction on some items. Respondents indicated high levels of satisfaction with information related to disease and treatment but lower levels of satisfaction for items related to genetic risk, sexual attractiveness and self care. Colorectal nurse specialists were highly rated, especially in terms of information provision and personal experience of care. Patients were generally amenable to telephone follow-up, although male patients indicated higher levels of willingness to accept this approach than females. Conclusions Satisfaction with traditional medical based follow-up is generally high in this patient cohort but there is room for improvement in terms of service delivery. High levels of satisfaction with the care delivered by colorectal nurse specialists and patient acceptance of telephone follow-up suggests nurse-led telephone follow-up is a viable alternative to traditional hospital based follow-up.

Purpose To explore patient satisfaction on different aspects of follow-up service provision following treatment for colorectal cancer and amenability to an alternative strategy for follow-up care. Methods and sample A postal survey was administered to 297 eligible patients who had been treated for colorectal cancer at a large hospital in the North West of England. Patients were asked to indicate responses to questions comprising likert scales, including views on organisation of care, information and advice, personal experience of care, satisfaction with information and care, views on specialist nursing services and amenability to telephone follow-up. Key results One hundred and eighty-seven completed surveys were returned (62.97% response rate). Analysis of scale data indicated high levels of satisfaction on all outcome measures but sub-optimal rates of satisfaction on some items. Respondents indicated high levels of satisfaction with information related to disease and treatment but lower levels of satisfaction for items related to genetic risk, sexual attractiveness and self care. Colorectal nurse specialists were highly rated, especially in terms of information provision and personal experience of care. Patients were generally amenable to telephone follow-up, although male patients indicated higher levels of willingness to accept this approach than females. Conclusions Satisfaction with traditional medical based follow-up is generally high in this patient cohort but there is room for improvement in terms of service delivery. High levels of satisfaction with the care delivered by colorectal nurse specialists and patient acceptance of telephone follow-up suggests nurse-led telephone follow-up is a viable alternative to traditional hospital based follow-up.

Purpose To explore patient satisfaction on different aspects of follow-up service provision following treatment for colorectal cancer and amenability to an alternative strategy for follow-up care. Methods and sample A postal survey was administered to 297 eligible patients who had been treated for colorectal cancer at a large hospital in the North West of England. Patients were asked to indicate responses to questions comprising likert scales, including views on organisation of care, information and advice, personal experience of care, satisfaction with information and care, views on specialist nursing services and amenability to telephone follow-up. Key results One hundred and eighty-seven completed surveys were returned (62.97% response rate). Analysis of scale data indicated high levels of satisfaction on all outcome measures but sub-optimal rates of satisfaction on some items. Respondents indicated high levels of satisfaction with information related to disease and treatment but lower levels of satisfaction for items related to genetic risk, sexual attractiveness and self care. Colorectal nurse specialists were highly rated, especially in terms of information provision and personal experience of care. Patients were generally amenable to telephone follow-up, although male patients indicated higher levels of willingness to accept this approach than females. Conclusions Satisfaction with traditional medical based follow-up is generally high in this patient cohort but there is room for improvement in terms of service delivery. High levels of satisfaction with the care delivered by colorectal nurse specialists and patient acceptance of telephone follow-up suggests nurse-led telephone follow-up is a viable alternative to traditional hospital based follow-up.

Purpose To explore patient satisfaction on different aspects of follow-up service provision following treatment for colorectal cancer and amenability to an alternative strategy for follow-up care. Methods and sample A postal survey was administered to 297 eligible patients who had been treated for colorectal cancer at a large hospital in the North West of England. Patients were asked to indicate responses to questions comprising likert scales, including views on organisation of care, information and advice, personal experience of care, satisfaction with information and care, views on specialist nursing services and amenability to telephone follow-up. Key results One hundred and eighty-seven completed surveys were returned (62.97% response rate). Analysis of scale data indicated high levels of satisfaction on all outcome measures but sub-optimal rates of satisfaction on some items. Respondents indicated high levels of satisfaction with information related to disease and treatment but lower levels of satisfaction for items related to genetic risk, sexual attractiveness and self care. Colorectal nurse specialists were highly rated, especially in terms of information provision and personal experience of care. Patients were generally amenable to telephone follow-up, although male patients indicated higher levels of willingness to accept this approach than females. Conclusions Satisfaction with traditional medical based follow-up is generally high in this patient cohort but there is room for improvement in terms of service delivery. High levels of satisfaction with the care delivered by colorectal nurse specialists and patient acceptance of telephone follow-up suggests nurse-led telephone follow-up is a viable alternative to traditional hospital based follow-up.

Background: This paper will report on the findings from an economic evaluation of traditional hospital follow-up versus telephone follow-up by specialist breast care nurses for patients treated for breast cancer in the United Kingdom (UK). Materials and Methods: We conducted a cost minimisation analysis from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective using data from a randomised controlled trial that demonstrated equivalence between hospital and telephone follow-up in terms of psychological morbidity; 374 participants at low-moderate risk of recurrence were recruited to the study. The study was carried out at two hospitals in the North West of Engalnd. In a primary analysis we compared NHS resource use for routine follow-up (i.e. consultations, investigations and referrals) during a mean follow-up period of 24 months. Secondary analyses included patient and carer travel and productivity costs incurred and the NHS and personal social services costs of care in the minority of patients who developed a recurrence of their breast cancer. Results: Participants in the telephone follow-up group had approximately 20% extra consultations (634 versus 524). Telephone consultations were of longer duration and conducted by senior nurses whereas hospital clinic appointments were of shorter duration and often conducted by junior medical staff; this resulted in higher routine follow-up costs in the telephone follow-up group (mean difference £55, 95% bCI £29-£77). There were no significant differences in the costs of treating recurrence between groups. Participants receiving hospital follow-up had significantly higher travel and productivity costs (mean difference £47; 95% bCI £40-£55). Conclusions: Telephone follow-up by specialist nurses may be a useful strategy for reducing the burden on busy hospital clinics and providing a quality service. Although patients and carers will have fewer costs with telephone follow-up, this approach will not necessarily lead to cost or salary savin

Background: This paper will report on the findings from an economic evaluation of traditional hospital follow-up versus telephone follow-up by specialist breast care nurses for patients treated for breast cancer in the United Kingdom (UK). Materials and Methods: We conducted a cost minimisation analysis from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective using data from a randomised controlled trial that demonstrated equivalence between hospital and telephone follow-up in terms of psychological morbidity; 374 participants at low-moderate risk of recurrence were recruited to the study. The study was carried out at two hospitals in the North West of Engalnd. In a primary analysis we compared NHS resource use for routine follow-up (i.e. consultations, investigations and referrals) during a mean follow-up period of 24 months. Secondary analyses included patient and carer travel and productivity costs incurred and the NHS and personal social services costs of care in the minority of patients who developed a recurrence of their breast cancer. Results: Participants in the telephone follow-up group had approximately 20% extra consultations (634 versus 524). Telephone consultations were of longer duration and conducted by senior nurses whereas hospital clinic appointments were of shorter duration and often conducted by junior medical staff; this resulted in higher routine follow-up costs in the telephone follow-up group (mean difference £55, 95% bCI £29-£77). There were no significant differences in the costs of treating recurrence between groups. Participants receiving hospital follow-up had significantly higher travel and productivity costs (mean difference £47; 95% bCI £40-£55). Conclusions: Telephone follow-up by specialist nurses may be a useful strategy for reducing the burden on busy hospital clinics and providing a quality service. Although patients and carers will have fewer costs with telephone follow-up, this approach will not necessarily lead to cost or salary savin

Background: This was an economic evaluation of hospital versus telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Methods: A cost minimization analysis was carried out from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective using data from a trial in which 374 women were randomized to telephone or hospital follow-up. Primary analysis compared NHS resource use for routine follow-up over a mean of 24 months. Secondary analyses included patient and carer travel and productivity costs, and NHS and personal social services costs of care in patients with recurrent breast cancer. Results: Patients who had telephone follow-up had approximately 20 per cent more consultations (634 versus 524). The longer duration of telephone consultations and the frequent use of junior medical staff in hospital clinics resulted in higher routine costs for telephone follow-up (mean difference £55 (bias-corrected 95 per cent confidence interval (b.c.i.) £29 to £77)). There were no significant differences in the costs of treating recurrence, but patients who had hospital-based follow-up had significantly higher travel and productivity costs (mean difference £47 (95 per cent b.c.i. £40 to £55)). Conclusion: Telephone follow-up for breast cancer may reduce the burden on busy hospital clinics but will not necessarily lead to cost or salary savings.

Objective To compare traditional hospital follow-up with telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Design A two centre randomised equivalence trial in which women remained in the study for a mean of 24 months. Setting Outpatient clinics in two NHS hospital trusts in the north west of England Participants 374 women treated for breast cancer who were at low to moderate risk of recurrence. Interventions Participants were randomised to traditional hospital follow-up (consultation, clinical examination, and mammography as per hospital policy) or telephone follow-up by specialist nurses (consultation with structured intervention and mammography according to hospital policy). Main outcome measures Psychological morbidity (state-trait anxiety inventory, general health questionnaire (GHQ-12)), participants’ needs for information, participants’ satisfaction, clinical investigations ordered, and time to detection of recurrent disease. Results The 95% confidence interval for difference in mean state-trait scores adjusted for treatment received (−3.33 to 2.07) was within the predefined equivalence region (−3.5 to 3.5). The women in the telephone group were no more anxious as a result of foregoing clinic examinations and face-to-face consultations and reported higher levels of satisfaction than those attending hospital clinics (intention to treat P<0.001). The numbers of clinical investigations ordered did not differ between groups. Recurrences were few (4.5%), with no differences between groups for time to detection (median 60.5 (range 37-131) days in hospital group v 39.0 (10-152) days in telephone group; P=0.228). Conclusions Telephone follow-up was well received by participants, with no physical or psychological disadvantage. It is suitable for women at low to moderate risk of recurrence and those with long travelling distances or mobility problems and decreases the burden on busy hospital clinics.

Objective To compare traditional hospital follow-up with telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Design A two centre randomised equivalence trial in which women remained in the study for a mean of 24 months. Setting Outpatient clinics in two NHS hospital trusts in the north west of England Participants 374 women treated for breast cancer who were at low to moderate risk of recurrence. Interventions Participants were randomised to traditional hospital follow-up (consultation, clinical examination, and mammography as per hospital policy) or telephone follow-up by specialist nurses (consultation with structured intervention and mammography according to hospital policy). Main outcome measures Psychological morbidity (state-trait anxiety inventory, general health questionnaire (GHQ-12)), participants’ needs for information, participants’ satisfaction, clinical investigations ordered, and time to detection of recurrent disease. Results The 95% confidence interval for difference in mean state-trait scores adjusted for treatment received (−3.33 to 2.07) was within the predefined equivalence region (−3.5 to 3.5). The women in the telephone group were no more anxious as a result of foregoing clinic examinations and face-to-face consultations and reported higher levels of satisfaction than those attending hospital clinics (intention to treat P<0.001). The numbers of clinical investigations ordered did not differ between groups. Recurrences were few (4.5%), with no differences between groups for time to detection (median 60.5 (range 37-131) days in hospital group v 39.0 (10-152) days in telephone group; P=0.228). Conclusions Telephone follow-up was well received by participants, with no physical or psychological disadvantage. It is suitable for women at low to moderate risk of recurrence and those with long travelling distances or mobility problems and decreases the burden on busy hospital clinics.

Background: This was an economic evaluation of hospital versus telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Methods: A cost minimization analysis was carried out from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective using data from a trial in which 374 women were randomized to telephone or hospital follow-up. Primary analysis compared NHS resource use for routine follow-up over a mean of 24 months. Secondary analyses included patient and carer travel and productivity costs, and NHS and personal social services costs of care in patients with recurrent breast cancer. Results: Patients who had telephone follow-up had approximately 20 per cent more consultations (634 versus 524). The longer duration of telephone consultations and the frequent use of junior medical staff in hospital clinics resulted in higher routine costs for telephone follow-up (mean difference £55 (bias-corrected 95 per cent confidence interval (b.c.i.) £29 to £77)). There were no significant differences in the costs of treating recurrence, but patients who had hospital-based follow-up had significantly higher travel and productivity costs (mean difference £47 (95 per cent b.c.i. £40 to £55)). Conclusion: Telephone follow-up for breast cancer may reduce the burden on busy hospital clinics but will not necessarily lead to cost or salary savings.

Objective To compare traditional hospital follow-up with telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Design A two centre randomised equivalence trial in which women remained in the study for a mean of 24 months. Setting Outpatient clinics in two NHS hospital trusts in the north west of England Participants 374 women treated for breast cancer who were at low to moderate risk of recurrence. Interventions Participants were randomised to traditional hospital follow-up (consultation, clinical examination, and mammography as per hospital policy) or telephone follow-up by specialist nurses (consultation with structured intervention and mammography according to hospital policy). Main outcome measures Psychological morbidity (state-trait anxiety inventory, general health questionnaire (GHQ-12)), participants’ needs for information, participants’ satisfaction, clinical investigations ordered, and time to detection of recurrent disease. Results The 95% confidence interval for difference in mean state-trait scores adjusted for treatment received (−3.33 to 2.07) was within the predefined equivalence region (−3.5 to 3.5). The women in the telephone group were no more anxious as a result of foregoing clinic examinations and face-to-face consultations and reported higher levels of satisfaction than those attending hospital clinics (intention to treat P<0.001). The numbers of clinical investigations ordered did not differ between groups. Recurrences were few (4.5%), with no differences between groups for time to detection (median 60.5 (range 37-131) days in hospital group v 39.0 (10-152) days in telephone group; P=0.228). Conclusions Telephone follow-up was well received by participants, with no physical or psychological disadvantage. It is suitable for women at low to moderate risk of recurrence and those with long travelling distances or mobility problems and decreases the burden on busy hospital clinics.

Background: This paper will report on the findings from an economic evaluation of traditional hospital follow-up versus telephone follow-up by specialist breast care nurses for patients treated for breast cancer in the United Kingdom (UK). Materials and Methods: We conducted a cost minimisation analysis from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective using data from a randomised controlled trial that demonstrated equivalence between hospital and telephone follow-up in terms of psychological morbidity; 374 participants at low-moderate risk of recurrence were recruited to the study. The study was carried out at two hospitals in the North West of Engalnd. In a primary analysis we compared NHS resource use for routine follow-up (i.e. consultations, investigations and referrals) during a mean follow-up period of 24 months. Secondary analyses included patient and carer travel and productivity costs incurred and the NHS and personal social services costs of care in the minority of patients who developed a recurrence of their breast cancer. Results: Participants in the telephone follow-up group had approximately 20% extra consultations (634 versus 524). Telephone consultations were of longer duration and conducted by senior nurses whereas hospital clinic appointments were of shorter duration and often conducted by junior medical staff; this resulted in higher routine follow-up costs in the telephone follow-up group (mean difference £55, 95% bCI £29-£77). There were no significant differences in the costs of treating recurrence between groups. Participants receiving hospital follow-up had significantly higher travel and productivity costs (mean difference £47; 95% bCI £40-£55). Conclusions: Telephone follow-up by specialist nurses may be a useful strategy for reducing the burden on busy hospital clinics and providing a quality service. Although patients and carers will have fewer costs with telephone follow-up, this approach will not necessarily lead to cost or salary savin

Background: This was an economic evaluation of hospital versus telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Methods: A cost minimization analysis was carried out from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective using data from a trial in which 374 women were randomized to telephone or hospital follow-up. Primary analysis compared NHS resource use for routine follow-up over a mean of 24 months. Secondary analyses included patient and carer travel and productivity costs, and NHS and personal social services costs of care in patients with recurrent breast cancer. Results: Patients who had telephone follow-up had approximately 20 per cent more consultations (634 versus 524). The longer duration of telephone consultations and the frequent use of junior medical staff in hospital clinics resulted in higher routine costs for telephone follow-up (mean difference £55 (bias-corrected 95 per cent confidence interval (b.c.i.) £29 to £77)). There were no significant differences in the costs of treating recurrence, but patients who had hospital-based follow-up had significantly higher travel and productivity costs (mean difference £47 (95 per cent b.c.i. £40 to £55)). Conclusion: Telephone follow-up for breast cancer may reduce the burden on busy hospital clinics but will not necessarily lead to cost or salary savings.

Objective To compare traditional hospital follow-up with telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Design A two centre randomised equivalence trial in which women remained in the study for a mean of 24 months. Setting Outpatient clinics in two NHS hospital trusts in the north west of England Participants 374 women treated for breast cancer who were at low to moderate risk of recurrence. Interventions Participants were randomised to traditional hospital follow-up (consultation, clinical examination, and mammography as per hospital policy) or telephone follow-up by specialist nurses (consultation with structured intervention and mammography according to hospital policy). Main outcome measures Psychological morbidity (state-trait anxiety inventory, general health questionnaire (GHQ-12)), participants’ needs for information, participants’ satisfaction, clinical investigations ordered, and time to detection of recurrent disease. Results The 95% confidence interval for difference in mean state-trait scores adjusted for treatment received (−3.33 to 2.07) was within the predefined equivalence region (−3.5 to 3.5). The women in the telephone group were no more anxious as a result of foregoing clinic examinations and face-to-face consultations and reported higher levels of satisfaction than those attending hospital clinics (intention to treat P<0.001). The numbers of clinical investigations ordered did not differ between groups. Recurrences were few (4.5%), with no differences between groups for time to detection (median 60.5 (range 37-131) days in hospital group v 39.0 (10-152) days in telephone group; P=0.228). Conclusions Telephone follow-up was well received by participants, with no physical or psychological disadvantage. It is suitable for women at low to moderate risk of recurrence and those with long travelling distances or mobility problems and decreases the burden on busy hospital clinics.

Objective To compare traditional hospital follow-up with telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Design A two centre randomised equivalence trial in which women remained in the study for a mean of 24 months. Setting Outpatient clinics in two NHS hospital trusts in the north west of England Participants 374 women treated for breast cancer who were at low to moderate risk of recurrence. Interventions Participants were randomised to traditional hospital follow-up (consultation, clinical examination, and mammography as per hospital policy) or telephone follow-up by specialist nurses (consultation with structured intervention and mammography according to hospital policy). Main outcome measures Psychological morbidity (state-trait anxiety inventory, general health questionnaire (GHQ-12)), participants’ needs for information, participants’ satisfaction, clinical investigations ordered, and time to detection of recurrent disease. Results The 95% confidence interval for difference in mean state-trait scores adjusted for treatment received (−3.33 to 2.07) was within the predefined equivalence region (−3.5 to 3.5). The women in the telephone group were no more anxious as a result of foregoing clinic examinations and face-to-face consultations and reported higher levels of satisfaction than those attending hospital clinics (intention to treat P<0.001). The numbers of clinical investigations ordered did not differ between groups. Recurrences were few (4.5%), with no differences between groups for time to detection (median 60.5 (range 37-131) days in hospital group v 39.0 (10-152) days in telephone group; P=0.228). Conclusions Telephone follow-up was well received by participants, with no physical or psychological disadvantage. It is suitable for women at low to moderate risk of recurrence and those with long travelling distances or mobility problems and decreases the burden on busy hospital clinics.

Background: This paper will report on the findings from an economic evaluation of traditional hospital follow-up versus telephone follow-up by specialist breast care nurses for patients treated for breast cancer in the United Kingdom (UK). Materials and Methods: We conducted a cost minimisation analysis from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective using data from a randomised controlled trial that demonstrated equivalence between hospital and telephone follow-up in terms of psychological morbidity; 374 participants at low-moderate risk of recurrence were recruited to the study. The study was carried out at two hospitals in the North West of Engalnd. In a primary analysis we compared NHS resource use for routine follow-up (i.e. consultations, investigations and referrals) during a mean follow-up period of 24 months. Secondary analyses included patient and carer travel and productivity costs incurred and the NHS and personal social services costs of care in the minority of patients who developed a recurrence of their breast cancer. Results: Participants in the telephone follow-up group had approximately 20% extra consultations (634 versus 524). Telephone consultations were of longer duration and conducted by senior nurses whereas hospital clinic appointments were of shorter duration and often conducted by junior medical staff; this resulted in higher routine follow-up costs in the telephone follow-up group (mean difference £55, 95% bCI £29-£77). There were no significant differences in the costs of treating recurrence between groups. Participants receiving hospital follow-up had significantly higher travel and productivity costs (mean difference £47; 95% bCI £40-£55). Conclusions: Telephone follow-up by specialist nurses may be a useful strategy for reducing the burden on busy hospital clinics and providing a quality service. Although patients and carers will have fewer costs with telephone follow-up, this approach will not necessarily lead to cost or salary savin

Background: This was an economic evaluation of hospital versus telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Methods: A cost minimization analysis was carried out from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective using data from a trial in which 374 women were randomized to telephone or hospital follow-up. Primary analysis compared NHS resource use for routine follow-up over a mean of 24 months. Secondary analyses included patient and carer travel and productivity costs, and NHS and personal social services costs of care in patients with recurrent breast cancer. Results: Patients who had telephone follow-up had approximately 20 per cent more consultations (634 versus 524). The longer duration of telephone consultations and the frequent use of junior medical staff in hospital clinics resulted in higher routine costs for telephone follow-up (mean difference £55 (bias-corrected 95 per cent confidence interval (b.c.i.) £29 to £77)). There were no significant differences in the costs of treating recurrence, but patients who had hospital-based follow-up had significantly higher travel and productivity costs (mean difference £47 (95 per cent b.c.i. £40 to £55)). Conclusion: Telephone follow-up for breast cancer may reduce the burden on busy hospital clinics but will not necessarily lead to cost or salary savings.

Objective To compare traditional hospital follow-up with telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. Design A two centre randomised equivalence trial in which women remained in the study for a mean of 24 months. Setting Outpatient clinics in two NHS hospital trusts in the north west of England Participants 374 women treated for breast cancer who were at low to moderate risk of recurrence. Interventions Participants were randomised to traditional hospital follow-up (consultation, clinical examination, and mammography as per hospital policy) or telephone follow-up by specialist nurses (consultation with structured intervention and mammography according to hospital policy). Main outcome measures Psychological morbidity (state-trait anxiety inventory, general health questionnaire (GHQ-12)), participants’ needs for information, participants’ satisfaction, clinical investigations ordered, and time to detection of recurrent disease. Results The 95% confidence interval for difference in mean state-trait scores adjusted for treatment received (−3.33 to 2.07) was within the predefined equivalence region (−3.5 to 3.5). The women in the telephone group were no more anxious as a result of foregoing clinic examinations and face-to-face consultations and reported higher levels of satisfaction than those attending hospital clinics (intention to treat P<0.001). The numbers of clinical investigations ordered did not differ between groups. Recurrences were few (4.5%), with no differences between groups for time to detection (median 60.5 (range 37-131) days in hospital group v 39.0 (10-152) days in telephone group; P=0.228). Conclusions Telephone follow-up was well received by participants, with no physical or psychological disadvantage. It is suitable for women at low to moderate risk of recurrence and those with long travelling distances or mobility problems and decreases the burden on busy hospital clinics.