University of Surrey

Test tubes in the lab Research in the ATI Dance Research

Follow-up after curative treatment for colorectal cancer: longitudinal evaluation of patient initiated follow-up in the first 12 months.

Batehup, L, Porter, K, Gage, Heather, Williams, Peter, Simmonds, P, Lowson, E, Dodson, L, Davies, NJ, Wagland, R, Winter, JD , Richardson, A, Turner, A and Corner, JL (2017) Follow-up after curative treatment for colorectal cancer: longitudinal evaluation of patient initiated follow-up in the first 12 months. Supportive Care in Cancer, 25 (7). pp. 2063-2073.

[img] Text
Follow-up after curative treatment for colorectal cancer - longitudinal evaluation of PTFU 05042016 docx revisions 14122016.docx - Accepted version Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only until 14 February 2018.
Available under License : See the attached licence file.

Download (70kB)
[img]
Preview
Text (licence)
SRI_deposit_agreement.pdf
Available under License : See the attached licence file.

Download (33kB) | Preview

Abstract

Purpose: To compare patient-triggered follow-up (PTFU) for curatively treated colorectal cancer against traditional outpatient follow-up (OPFU). Methods: Questionnaires were mailed at four time points over one-year post-treatment to two prospectively-recruited cohorts: A, patients entering follow-up and receiving OPFU pre-implementation of PTFU; B, patients entering follow-up (FU) and receiving either OPFU (B1) or PTFU (B2) post-implementation of PTFU. Bi-variate tests were used to compare patient characteristics and outcomes eight months after entering follow-up (generic and cancer-specific quality of life (QoL), satisfaction). Regression analysis explored associations between follow-up model and outcomes. Resource implications and costs of models were compared. Results: Patients in Cohort B1 were significantly more likely to have received chemotherapy (p<0.001), radiotherapy (p<0.05), and reported poorer QoL (p=0.001). Having a longstanding co-morbid condition was the most important determinant of QoL (p<0.001); model of care was not significant. Patients were satisfied with their follow-up care regardless of model. Health service costs were higher in PTFU over the first year Conclusions: PTFU is acceptable to patients with colorectal cancer and can be considered to be a realistic alternative to OPFU for clinically suitable patients. The initial costs are higher due to provision of a self-management (SM) programme and remote surveillance. . Further research is needed to establish long-term outcomes and costs.

Item Type: Article
Subjects : Economics
Divisions : Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences > School of Economics
Authors :
NameEmailORCID
Batehup, LUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Porter, KUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Gage, HeatherH.Gage@surrey.ac.ukUNSPECIFIED
Williams, PeterP.Williams@surrey.ac.ukUNSPECIFIED
Simmonds, PUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Lowson, EUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Dodson, LUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Davies, NJUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Wagland, RUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Winter, JDUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Richardson, AUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Turner, AUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Corner, JLUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Date : 14 February 2017
Identification Number : 10.1007/s00520-017-3595-x
Copyright Disclaimer : The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3595-x
Uncontrolled Keywords : colorectal cancer; aftercare; follow-up; patient triggered-follow-up; remote surveillance
Related URLs :
Depositing User : Symplectic Elements
Date Deposited : 01 Mar 2017 12:12
Last Modified : 06 Jul 2017 07:01
URI: http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/id/eprint/813652

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year


Information about this web site

© The University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XH, United Kingdom.
+44 (0)1483 300800