Exploring health care professionals views on alternative approaches to cancer follow-up and barriers and facilitators to implementation of a recovery package
<p><strong>Purpose</strong> To meet the long-term needs of cancer survivors the focus of recent cancer care reform in the United Kingdom (UK) has been the implementation of alternative follow-up strategies to relieve the growing pressures threatening to overwhelm cancer services. I...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2020
|
| _version_ | 1797059123124109312 |
|---|---|
| author | Williamson, S Beaver, K Langton, S |
| author_facet | Williamson, S Beaver, K Langton, S |
| author_sort | Williamson, S |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <p><strong>Purpose</strong>
To meet the long-term needs of cancer survivors the focus of recent cancer care reform in the United Kingdom (UK) has been the implementation of alternative follow-up strategies to relieve the growing pressures threatening to overwhelm cancer services. In 2013, the UK's National Cancer Survivorship Initiative recommended an integrated package of care called the Recovery Package to meet cancer survivors' psychosocial and information needs and supported self-management.</p>
<p><strong>Method</strong>
We aimed to explore health care professionals’ views of alternative strategies for follow-up care, and perceived barriers and facilitators to implementation of the Recovery Package for patients who had completed treatment for cancer. Semi-structured interviews with 19 participants sought views and experiences of key aspects of cancer care follow-up and aspects of the Recovery Package implementation.</p>
<p><strong>Results</strong>
Seven themes emerged from the data; sustainability and capacity, cost implications, primary care, self-management, recovery package, resistance to change, and visions for the future. Traditional hospital follow-up was considered suitable for patients with complex needs, rarer forms of cancer and/or a poorer prognosis. Risk stratification was considered a vital element of any future strategy as was interoperability of digital communication systems between health care providers. Charitable funding had enabled one site to introduce all elements of the recovery package for patients with common cancers.</p>
<p><strong>Conclusion</strong>
Charitable funding had enabled implementation of elements of the Recovery Package. However, new approaches require services to be commissioned and funded appropriately with effective communication between patients and primary and secondary care facilitated by interoperability of health care records.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-06T19:59:44Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:26dcb2e6-859f-440c-add5-08ee9746975f |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-06T19:59:44Z |
| publishDate | 2020 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:26dcb2e6-859f-440c-add5-08ee9746975f2022-03-26T12:03:37ZExploring health care professionals views on alternative approaches to cancer follow-up and barriers and facilitators to implementation of a recovery packageJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:26dcb2e6-859f-440c-add5-08ee9746975fEnglishSymplectic ElementsElsevier 2020Williamson, SBeaver, KLangton, S<p><strong>Purpose</strong> To meet the long-term needs of cancer survivors the focus of recent cancer care reform in the United Kingdom (UK) has been the implementation of alternative follow-up strategies to relieve the growing pressures threatening to overwhelm cancer services. In 2013, the UK's National Cancer Survivorship Initiative recommended an integrated package of care called the Recovery Package to meet cancer survivors' psychosocial and information needs and supported self-management.</p> <p><strong>Method</strong> We aimed to explore health care professionals’ views of alternative strategies for follow-up care, and perceived barriers and facilitators to implementation of the Recovery Package for patients who had completed treatment for cancer. Semi-structured interviews with 19 participants sought views and experiences of key aspects of cancer care follow-up and aspects of the Recovery Package implementation.</p> <p><strong>Results</strong> Seven themes emerged from the data; sustainability and capacity, cost implications, primary care, self-management, recovery package, resistance to change, and visions for the future. Traditional hospital follow-up was considered suitable for patients with complex needs, rarer forms of cancer and/or a poorer prognosis. Risk stratification was considered a vital element of any future strategy as was interoperability of digital communication systems between health care providers. Charitable funding had enabled one site to introduce all elements of the recovery package for patients with common cancers.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion</strong> Charitable funding had enabled implementation of elements of the Recovery Package. However, new approaches require services to be commissioned and funded appropriately with effective communication between patients and primary and secondary care facilitated by interoperability of health care records.</p> |
| spellingShingle | Williamson, S Beaver, K Langton, S Exploring health care professionals views on alternative approaches to cancer follow-up and barriers and facilitators to implementation of a recovery package |
| title | Exploring health care professionals views on alternative approaches to cancer follow-up and barriers and facilitators to implementation of a recovery package |
| title_full | Exploring health care professionals views on alternative approaches to cancer follow-up and barriers and facilitators to implementation of a recovery package |
| title_fullStr | Exploring health care professionals views on alternative approaches to cancer follow-up and barriers and facilitators to implementation of a recovery package |
| title_full_unstemmed | Exploring health care professionals views on alternative approaches to cancer follow-up and barriers and facilitators to implementation of a recovery package |
| title_short | Exploring health care professionals views on alternative approaches to cancer follow-up and barriers and facilitators to implementation of a recovery package |
| title_sort | exploring health care professionals views on alternative approaches to cancer follow up and barriers and facilitators to implementation of a recovery package |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT williamsons exploringhealthcareprofessionalsviewsonalternativeapproachestocancerfollowupandbarriersandfacilitatorstoimplementationofarecoverypackage AT beaverk exploringhealthcareprofessionalsviewsonalternativeapproachestocancerfollowupandbarriersandfacilitatorstoimplementationofarecoverypackage AT langtons exploringhealthcareprofessionalsviewsonalternativeapproachestocancerfollowupandbarriersandfacilitatorstoimplementationofarecoverypackage |