Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Quality & Safety in Health Care logoLink to Quality & Safety in Health Care
. 2003 Aug;12(4):263–272. doi: 10.1136/qhc.12.4.263

Randomised controlled trial of a shared care programme for newly referred cancer patients: bridging the gap between general practice and hospital

J Nielsen 1, T Palshof 1, J Mainz 1, A Jensen 1, F Olesen 1
PMCID: PMC1743735  PMID: 12897359

Abstract

Objective: To determine the effect of a shared care programme on the attitudes of newly referred cancer patients towards the healthcare system and their health related quality of life and performance status, and to assess patients' reports on contacts with their general practitioner (GP).

Setting: Department of Oncology at Aarhus University Hospital and general practices.

Design: Randomised controlled trial in which patients completed questionnaires at three time points. The shared care programme included transfer of knowledge from the oncologist to the GP, improved communication between the parties, and active patient involvement.

Participants: 248 consecutive cancer patients recently referred to the department.

Main outcome measures: Patients' attitudes towards the healthcare services, their health related quality of life, performance status, and reports on contacts with their GPs.

Results: The shared care programme had a positive effect on patient evaluation of cooperation between the primary and secondary healthcare sectors. The effect was particularly significant in men and in younger patients (18–49 years) who felt they received more care from the GP and were left less in limbo. Young patients in the intervention group rated the GP's knowledge of disease and treatment significantly higher than young patients in the control group. The number of contacts with the GP was significantly higher in the intervention group. The EORTC quality of life questionnaire and performance status showed no significant differences between the two groups.

Conclusions: An intersectoral shared care programme in which GPs and patients are actively involved has a positive influence on patients' attitudes towards the healthcare system. Young patients and men particularly benefit from the programme.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (153.5 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Aaronson N. K., Ahmedzai S., Bergman B., Bullinger M., Cull A., Duez N. J., Filiberti A., Flechtner H., Fleishman S. B., de Haes J. C. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993 Mar 3;85(5):365–376. doi: 10.1093/jnci/85.5.365. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Baker R., Preston C., Cheater F., Hearnshaw H. Measuring patients' attitudes to care across the primary/secondary interface: the development of the patient career diary. Qual Health Care. 1999 Sep;8(3):154–160. doi: 10.1136/qshc.8.3.154. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Dahler-Eriksen K., Nielsen J. D., Lassen J. F., Olesen F. Tvaersektorielle behandlingsprogrammer--et eksempel på det samarbejdende sundhedsvaesen. En kommenteret oversigt. Ugeskr Laeger. 1998 Aug 24;160(35):5021–5024. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Fawzy F. I., Fawzy N. W., Arndt L. A., Pasnau R. O. Critical review of psychosocial interventions in cancer care. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1995 Feb;52(2):100–113. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1995.03950140018003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Ford S., Lewis S., Fallowfield L. Psychological morbidity in newly referred patients with cancer. J Psychosom Res. 1995 Feb;39(2):193–202. doi: 10.1016/0022-3999(94)00103-c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Groenvold M., Klee M. C., Sprangers M. A., Aaronson N. K. Validation of the EORTC QLQ-C30 quality of life questionnaire through combined qualitative and quantitative assessment of patient-observer agreement. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 Apr;50(4):441–450. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(96)00428-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Guillemin F., Bombardier C., Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993 Dec;46(12):1417–1432. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-n. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hall J. A., Dornan M. C. Patient sociodemographic characteristics as predictors of satisfaction with medical care: a meta-analysis. Soc Sci Med. 1990;30(7):811–818. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(90)90205-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hampson J. P., Roberts R. I., Morgan D. A. Shared care: a review of the literature. Fam Pract. 1996 Jun;13(3):264–279. doi: 10.1093/fampra/13.3.264. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Harrison J., Maguire P., Pitceathly C. Confiding in crisis: gender differences in pattern of confiding among cancer patients. Soc Sci Med. 1995 Nov;41(9):1255–1260. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)00411-l. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. James J. A., Harris D. J., Mott M. G., Oakhill A. Paediatric oncology information pack for general practitioners. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1988 Jan 9;296(6615):97–98. doi: 10.1136/bmj.296.6615.97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Nielsen J. D., Palshof T., Olesen F. Tvaersektorielt samarbejde omkring kraeftpatienter i nystartede behandlingsforløb. Ideer og temaer udsprunget af fokusgruppeinterview med praktiserende laeger og onkologer. Ugeskr Laeger. 1999 Apr 5;161(14):2074–2078. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Preston C., Cheater F., Baker R., Hearnshaw H. Left in limbo: patients' views on care across the primary/secondary interface. Qual Health Care. 1999 Mar;8(1):16–21. doi: 10.1136/qshc.8.1.16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Rosser J. E., Maguire P. Dilemmas in general practice: the care of the cancer patients. Soc Sci Med. 1982;16(3):315–322. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(82)90341-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Sprangers M. A., Cull A., Bjordal K., Groenvold M., Aaronson N. K. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Approach to quality of life assessment: guidelines for developing questionnaire modules. EORTC Study Group on Quality of Life. Qual Life Res. 1993 Aug;2(4):287–295. doi: 10.1007/BF00434800. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Sprangers M. A., Cull A., Groenvold M., Bjordal K., Blazeby J., Aaronson N. K. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer approach to developing questionnaire modules: an update and overview. EORTC Quality of Life Study Group. Qual Life Res. 1998 May;7(4):291–300. doi: 10.1023/a:1024977728719. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Tattersall M. H., Thomas H. Recent advances: oncology. BMJ. 1999 Feb 13;318(7181):445–448. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7181.445. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Wiggers J. H., Donovan K. O., Redman S., Sanson-Fisher R. W. Cancer patient satisfaction with care. Cancer. 1990 Aug 1;66(3):610–616. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19900801)66:3<610::aid-cncr2820660335>3.0.co;2-t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Wood M. L., McWilliam C. L. Cancer in remission. Challenge in collaboration for family physicians and oncologists. Can Fam Physician. 1996 May;42:899–910. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Quality & safety in health care are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES