Search

Introduction: Facilitators to implement shared cancer follow‐up care into clinical practice include mechanisms to allow the oncologist to continue overseeing the care of their patient, two‐way information sharing and clear follow‐up protocols for general practitioners (GPs). This paper aimed to evaluate patients, GPs and radiation oncologists (ROs) acceptance of a shared care intervention. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted pre‐ and post intervention with patients that were 3 years post radiotherapy treatment for breast, colorectal or prostate cancer, their RO, and their GP. Inductive and deductive thematical analysis was employed. Results: Thirty‐two participants were interviewed (19 patients, 9 GPs, and 4 ROs). Pre intervention, there was support for GPs to play a greater role in cancer follow‐up care, however, patients were concerned about the GPs cancer‐specific skills. Patients, GPs and ROs were concerned about increasing the GPs workload. Post intervention, participants were satisfied that the GPs had specific skills and that the impact on GP workload was comparable to writing a referral. However, GPs expressed concern about remuneration. GPs and ROs felt the model provided patient choice and were suitable for low‐risk, stable patients around 2–3 years post treatment. Patients emphasised that they trusted their RO to advise them on the most appropriate follow‐up model suited to their individual situation. The overall acceptance of shared care depended on successful health technology to connect the GP and RO. There were no differences in patient acceptance between rural, regional, and cancer types. ROs presented differences in acceptance for the different cancer types, with breast cancer strongly supported. Conclusion: Patients, GPs and ROs felt this shared cancer follow‐up model of care was acceptable, but only if the RO remained directly involved and the health technology worked. There is a need to review funding and advocate for health technology advances to support integration. Patient or Public Contribution: Patients treated with curative radiotherapy for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer, their RO and their GPs were actively involved in this study by giving their consent to be interviewed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports an Australian project designed to simultaneously explore and capacity build professional practice when working at the intersection of parental mental health and/or problematic substance use and domestic violence (DV). Data from this paper are derived from two main sources: observations and ethnographic notes obtained during 28 Community of Practice (CoP) meetings and semi‐structured interviews with 28 CoP participants. Participants were front‐line workers from a range of government and non‐government organizations providing services to families experiencing DV across three Australian states who participated in The STACY Project: Safe and Together Addressing ComplexitY. Thematic analysis was employed to examine the research questions: How do professionals and organizations understand and respond to families experiencing DV, parental mental health difficulties and problematic substance use issues? How did practitioners report participation in the STACY Project reorienting professional practice with families experiencing DV, parental mental health difficulties, and substance misuse issues? This paper reports workers' exploration of practice implications. The research found that 'domestic violence blind' practice has become entrenched at the intersections of child protection, substance misuse and mental health problems, but a shared framework could bring practitioners from diverse sectors together to generate new ways of working with these complex problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]