Search

Few studies have evaluated initiatives targeting implementation of cancer rehabilitation. In this study we aim to test the effects of a complex intervention designed to improve general practitioners' (GPs) involvement in cancer rehabilitation. Outcomes were proactive contacts to patients by their GP reported by the patients and GPs, respectively, and patients' participation in rehabilitation activities. Methods. Cluster randomised controlled trial. All general practices in Denmark were randomised to an intervention group or to a control group (usual procedures). Patients were subsequently allocated to the intervention or the control group based on randomisation status of their GP. Between May 2008 and February 2009, adult patients treated for incident cancer at Vejle Hospital, Denmark, were assessed for eligibility. A total of 323 general practices were included, allocating 486 patients to an intervention and 469 to a control group. The intervention included a patient interview about rehabilitation with a rehabilitation coordinator at the hospital, comprehensive information to the GP about individual needs for rehabilitation, and an encouragement to the GP to contact the patient proactively. Questionnaires were administered to patients and GPs at 14 months after inclusion. Results. At baseline average age of patients was 63 years and 72% were female. The most frequent cancer localisations were breast (43%), lung (15%), and malignant melanoma (8%). The intervention had no effect on either patient- or GP-reported extent of GP proactivity. Further, no effect was observed on patient participation in rehabilitation activities during the 14-month follow-up period. Discussion. The intervention had no effect on GP proactivity or on patient participation in rehabilitation activities. However, analyses showed a significant association between proactivity and participation and we, therefore, conclude that increased GP proactivity may facilitate patient participation in rehabilitation activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Two conceptually different morbidity outcomes unmet needs and health-related quality of life are used to identify cancer patients in need of clinical attention and to evaluate rehabilitation programmes. The knowledge on the interrelation between unmet needs and health-related quality of life is scarce. This paper studies the hypothesis that patient-perceived unmet needs of rehabilitation during the cancer trajectory are associated with decreased quality of life. Material and methods. Based on registers, a Danish population-based cohort of adult, incident, mixed-site cancer patients diagnosed between 1 October 2007 and 30 September 2008 was established. At 14 months following diagnosis participants completed a questionnaire including health-related quality of life (EORTC QLQ C-30), psychological distress (POMS-SF), and unmet needs with regard to physical, emotional, family-oriented, sexual, work-related, and financial problems. Unmet needs were assessed through six ad hoc questions. Results. Questionnaires were received from 3439 of 4947 patients, resulting in a response rate of 70%. The three most frequent cancer types were breast (28.4%), prostate (14.6%) and colorectal cancer (15.2%). Overall, 60.1% expressed an unmet need of rehabilitation in at least one area, physical and emotional problems being the most frequent (40.0% and 37.5%). For all scales of the EORTC QLQ C-30 and POMS, significant adjusted mean differences were observed between patients with unmet needs in at least one area and patients with no unmet needs (p-values < 0.001). These differences were well above levels usually considered clinically relevant. Further, impairment increased with increasing number of areas in which unmet needs were reported. Discussion. We confirmed the hypothesis that patient-perceived unmet needs of rehabilitation during the cancer trajectory are associated with decreased quality of life. This study supports the use of unmet needs questions to identify patients in need of clinical attention. Interventions reducing cancer patients' perceived needs of rehabilitation may enhance quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]