
Personalizing Post-Treatment Cancer Care: A Cross-Sectional Survey of the Needs and Preferences of Well Survivors of Breast Cancer
Author(s) -
Jennifer Kwan,
Jennifer Croke,
Tony Panzarella,
Kuldesh Ubhi,
Anthony Fyles,
Anne Koch,
Robert Dinniwell,
Wilfred Levin,
David R. McCready,
Caroline Chung,
FeiFei Liu,
Jacqueline L. Bender
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
current oncology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.053
H-Index - 51
eISSN - 1718-7729
pISSN - 1198-0052
DOI - 10.3747/co.26.4131
Subject(s) - medicine , logistic regression , family medicine , patient satisfaction , breast cancer , cross sectional study , confidentiality , descriptive statistics , nursing , cancer , statistics , mathematics , pathology , political science , law
Background: Improved treatments resulting in a rising number of survivors of breast cancer (bca) calls for optimization of current specialist-based follow-up care. In the present study, we evaluated well survivors of bca with respect to their supportive care needs and attitudes toward follow-up with various care providers, in varying settings, or mediated by technology (for example, videoconference or e-mail). Methods: A cross-sectional paper survey of well survivors of early-stage pT1–2N0 bca undergoing posttreatment follow-up was completed. Descriptive and univariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine associations between survivor characteristics, supportive care needs, and perceived satisfaction with follow-up options. Qualitative responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Results: The 190 well survivors of bca who participated (79% response rate) had an average age of 63 ± 10 years. Median time since first follow-up was 21 months. Most had high perceived satisfaction with in-person specialist care (96%, 177 of 185). The second most accepted model was shared care involving specialist and primary care provider follow-up (54%, 102 of 190). Other models received less than 50% perceived satisfaction. Factors associated with higher perceived satisfaction with non-specialist care or virtual follow-up by a specialist included less formal education (p < 0.01) and more met supportive care needs (p < 0.05). Concerns with virtual follow-up included the perceived impersonal nature of virtual care, potential for inadequate care, and confidentiality. Conclusions: Well survivors of bca want specialists involved in their follow-up care. Compared with virtual followup, in-person follow-up is perceived as more reassuring. Certain survivor characteristics (for example, met supportive care needs) might signal survivor readiness for virtual or non-specialist follow-up. Future work should examine multi-stakeholder perspectives about barriers to and facilitators of shared multimodal follow-up care.